Deletion of Vernon Coleman (2nd nomination)

Comment: unless we can turn up an adequate supply of in-depth mainstream sources to provide a properly |neutral point of view on his |fringe opinions. The first AfD discussed the quantity of independent sourcing, but did not address the requirement that sourcing provide a neutral point of view. And even if adequate good sources can be found it looks like we would need to burn it to the ground first, and then likely indefinitely semiprotect it against restoration of the promotionalism and crankery Special:Diff/946494956|as has already happened more than once
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:FRINGE)

Comment: There might be a case for wiki-notability, but there's a much stronger case for 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: per nom. Most of the subject's self-published books are either out of print or being given away on Amazon for zero dollars as a Kindle book. A WorldCat search turned up a nominal number of his titles in libraries, despite the number of books he has released. A Google search turned up no significant or wide coverage of him by reliable, third-party sources. He appears to punch out books yet they have not been well received and have received no significant reviews. The article does not come close to meeting , and it fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BIO||WP:NAUTHOR)