Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tax-Free Wealth

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:13, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tax-Free Wealth

Tax-Free Wealth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Promotional UPE spam. Fails

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:11, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Taking a look, the book doesn't seem to have any coverage out there that's in-depth and reliable. Of the sources on the article, some are written by Wheelright himself, at least one is a press release, and the others are also unusable to show notability as they're either self-published Forbes contributor blogs or they're sources that only quote Wheelright without actually going into any depth on the book or are otherwise not about the book at all. The sources aren't even usable to show notability for the author, to be honest. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:11, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I would like a chance to improve the sourcing of the article, with the intent of keeping it up.
  talk) 18:11, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Comment Since it has been pointed out that it is advised that the article creator mainly comments and allows others to vote, I am going to withdraw my vote and change it to a comment. I have since added a few more sources, and will continue to improve the article until the discussion is closed, for deletion or not.

talk) 02:16, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Comment KoenigWrites is the article's creator. Narky Blert (talk) 05:43, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not notable, just like its author (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Wheelwright (author). The claimed references are either mentions along with others , presumably arranged by the authors PR agent, or self-serving pseudo-interviews. The editor is an incompletely declared paud editor who has never declared with respect to this article. Arguments by paid editors, declared or not, for their own paid articles need a certain amount of discounting, for reasons that should be obvious. (the advice for those whose articles ae nominated for deletion is to comment, as for anyone else with direct COI, and let others decide. DGG ( talk ) 18:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The
  WP:GNG. Narky Blert (talk) 05:40, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete - there are no reviews in
  reliable sources about this book. Compare a contemporaneous book about a similar topic, A_Failure_of_Capitalism. Bearian (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete Per Narky Blert. When my antivirus starts freaking out when I look at one of the sources, I know it is going to be a bad source. Rockphed (talk) 13:17, 18 September 2019 (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.