Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Stuart-Kotze

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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:36, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Stuart-Kotze

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

Unsourced and moderately advertorialized article about a writer who has no genuinely strong claim to passing WP:AUTHOR besides the fact that he and his work exist. This reads more like the kind of author profile one might expect to find on his own self-published website than like an encyclopedia article -- and the context of the books listed in "further reading" is unclear, as at least two of them were published before he or his work could possibly have been addressed as a subject in them (a management book published in 1954, for example, cannot possibly be relevant to the notability of a person who was only 15 years old at the time and didn't even start working as a management consultant for another decade-plus). And a third is the PhD thesis of a person with whom the subject directly coauthored other works -- so even if he's cited in or the subject of any content in that thesis, it would fail our requirement that sources have to be independent of the subject to support notability. As always, Wikipedia is not LinkedIn -- he's not entitled to have an article on here just because he exists, but his notability isn't being properly demonstrated or sourced by this article. Bearcat (talk) 18:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because if he warrants a WP article then I and a bunch of my friends do too (note: we haven't got one). Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 13:16, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not Linkedin.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:41, 16 January 2018 (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.