Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Eng (3rd nomination)

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Eng

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

This article had been deleted twice pursuant to discussions in 2005 and 2006. The most notable event, obviously, came after (in 2007), but I still believe that this person is not sufficiently notable — WP:15M applies in this case, I think. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 15:47, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The 2005 discussion is not automatically linked: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Che-Tew Eng
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. Non-notable writer known only for two racist statements. The article itself admits that his books are vanity published, so he fails WP:BK and WP:AUTHOR. Article was already deleted after two previous AfDs. Let's stop wasting our time with this--salt it. Qworty (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable. Jonathanwallace (talk) 12:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. Racepacket (talk) 13:13, 21 January 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.