Deletion of Michael Hatt

Comment: Six new sources have now been added to the article. Of those, https://britishart.yale.edu/exhibitions/sculpture-victorious-art-age-invention-1837-1901 one does not mention the subject, and the other five https://academic.oup.com/jdh/article-abstract/25/4/427/431551?redirectedFrom=fulltexthttps://reviews.history.ac.uk/review/1121https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-british-studies/article/morna-oneill-and-michael-hatt-eds-the-edwardian-sense-art-design-and-performance-in-britain-19011910-studies-in-british-art-vol-20-new-haven-ct-yale-university-press-2010-pp-328-6500-cloth/D8085229715AEBA16B456A70FC095612https://www.jstor.org/stable/23265584?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contentshttps://yalebooks.co.uk/display.asp?K=9780300247473 are all links to works authored or edited by the subject, despite the way some are attributed in the ref section. Those five sources would be fine to list in the Selected works section, but they cannot be used to establish notability because they are . In order for the subject to pass /, secondary sourcing is needed. I have done some more Googling but still cannot find any
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARY||WP:GNG||WP:NPROF)