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. - Mailer Diablo 16:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Reed

[edit]

Contested prod. Doesn't appear to meet the includion criteria set out at WP:BIO—delete. Note, this article overwrote an article on a wrestler; the notability of the wrestler should be decided separately.-- Jeremy (talk) 03:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)'[reply]

Delete. Non-notable. googling finds few references. The claimed USA Today reference is from an outdated sites-of-the-day page that now links to only a web-squatter [1] and the scifi channel reference finds only quotes from websites trying to sell his books. Also, the only comments on Lulu.com for his books are by himself and are just reiterating the quotes from his website. Also, they are both ranked over 20000 on the best seller list of lulu.com [2] [3] --Evan S e eds (talk) 03:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-09 15:44Z
Delete as per all above reasons. Alto Sax 456 21:32, 9 April 2007 (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.