Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chip Espinoza

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. joe decker ^talk 17:01, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chip Espinoza

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

Questionably notable and improvable as the best search links I found were this, this and this. This has not changed much since starting in April 2013 so comments about this would be helpful. Pinging DGG (I don't suppose you could comment at some of the AfDs I've listed at your talk page?) and Rich Farmbrough and I would've also included User:Blanchardb but they are not noticeably active. SwisterTwister talk 05:45, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. very minor notability at best, and considerable promotionalism . One book by Wiley *for which he was one of 3 authors) , an established publisher--other claimed books are totally insignificant. The sort of media experiences he made are wholly trivial. The section on quotes is pure promotionalism way out of proportion with the subject's importance. SwisterTwister, I'm still trying to clear up the backlog from Washington. DGG ( talk ) 06:24, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pearson are an established general publisher, one of the largest. FranklinCovey are a niche management/leadership publisher, whose flagship product is "7 Habits". Nonetheless we need significant RS about him, preferably, or at a pinch his books. (If his books do not meet GNG individually, but do collectively that would satisfy me.) This might lead to some of his other activities, though it probably does not count as independent itself. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:48, 15 October 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Regardless of publisher, the key thing is that none of the books has over 50 library holdings. in Worldcat,and in the field of popular self-help business books, that is about as insignificant as you can get. And the only one with more than 20 holdings is the one by Wiley. That's not a formal criterion, but when its as clear as this it's a very useful guide. DGG ( talk ) 16:42, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, so far failure to meet GNG. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:34, 17 October 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 16:49, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:33, 29 October 2015 (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.