Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Valentine


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 10:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Tom Valentine
A non-notable health quack. Books were not significant and are out of print or self-published. Delete. KleenupKrew 22:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has numerous books listed. The fact that they are out of print is irrelevant. I also object to the word quack. Please make your case without attacking article subjects. --JJay 01:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Whether a book is in print or not should be completely irrelevant to the discussion of one's notability.  The man has written a number of books for non-vanity presses, which seals it easily for me, but he also appears to meet basic standards in other areas. --badlydrawnjeff talk 02:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep marginally notable. Eluchil404 01:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.