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 keep. Cirt (talk) 08:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Alexander[edit]

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

Article doesn't establish his notability beyond perhaps being wealthy, and a socialite.

References appear to be from his own site, and are possibly copyright violations. Parrot of Doom 16:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep - i did a google news search only for 'scott alexander vainest man' and found

http://sofiaecho.com/2006/06/08/638873_british-millionaire-buys-village-in-bulgaria

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-400222/Britains-vainest-man.html

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-16223525_ITM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/beauty/3355650/The-secret-of-no-cellulite.html

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=64512

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1727137.html

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10385277

some of these are about his attempts to buy a town in bulgaria, and others are about how he was voted britain's vainest man. i believe these multiple RS's about multiple events constitute significant 3rd party coverage

Theserialcomma (talk) 17:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep Lover of Cara Van Man. Inherently notable. 86.177.90.110 (talk) 17:58, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Notability is not inherited, especially from a non-notable person. KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
comment more sources:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/real_life/article438161.ece "SCOTT Alexander spends £100000 a year on designer clothes and salon .."

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/215/215039_millionaire_buys_town__and_names_it_after_himself.html millionaire buys town, names it after himself

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/showbiz/s/227/227590_britains_vainest_man_wants_more_tv_exposure.html 'Britain's vainest man' wants more TV exposure

http://www.awaaznews.com/0706/July06_for_web.pdf

http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/sleep-when-youre-dead--still-no-moving-sidewalks--whistleblowers-wanted--another-victim-of-gods-sense-of-irony--lions-2-god-0--corner-of-alexander-st-and-alexander-ave--i-r/Content?oid=928220 britain's vainest man

how could anyone even argue that he's non-notable? i have only googled 'vainest' about him. he's (in)famous for other things too. Theserialcomma (talk) 18:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I looked at the article, there was nothing to suggest he was notable. No reliable sources, no assertion of notability, nothing. All I saw was a poorly-written advertisement for someone who appears to have lots of money. I hardly think that alone counts as notable. Parrot of Doom 18:55, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 03:24, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but re-write. I do think the possible copyright violations need to be looked into. But other than that, I see no reason why this shouldn't be kept. Tarheel95 (talk) 03:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - All the sources, links etc. can establish notability, but it could do with a rewrite/cleanup. No real reason to delete, Lord Spongefrog, (Talk to me, or I'll eat your liver!) 19:41, 25 November 2009 (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.