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 was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Bass[edit]

Alan Bass (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable individual lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. ttonyb (talk) 16:21, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as failing the general and author notability guidelines. The only thing saving this from an A7 speedy deletion is the fact that the subject has produced a self-published book.  -- Lear's Fool 04:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong delete. This is someone engaging in self-promotion. It was an excuse to post another article about his non-notable book. I marked it for speedy, which was rejected on procedural grounds (fair enough) by [[User:Lear's Fool]; he then PRODded the article, which the original author promptly took down. Salting may be necessary. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:16, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the subject was not the original author, as evidence below. My apologies for the mistaken assumption, but my motion to delete stands. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:53, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I just noticed my article on here but some of the facts are wrong. Who do I talk to about having them changed/taken out? Thanks! -Alanbasswriting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbasswriting (talk • contribs) 04:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It will probably be a moot point, as you do not appear to meet our notability standards. - Realkyhick (Talk to me)

Ah, okay. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbasswriting (talk • contribs) 13:29, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete May be notable some day. If the book gets taken up by a notable publisher and sells well enough, maybe. As to changing things, anyone can do that (but beware of WP:COI, our policy on conflict of interest) but unless the intention is to demonstrate compliance with our notability requirements, I wouldn't bother. Keep up the writing, but try and get with a recognised publisher. Only use self-pub if all else fails - and even then consider if the rejecters are really a load of biased shit-heads or if they have a point that needs addressing. Peridon (talk) 15:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not notable at all, I'm not sure where this page came from. But thanks, I appreciate it. FYI, self-publishing was used at the advice of a colleague who also published a book. Not relevant, but still :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbasswriting (talk • contribs) 05:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.