Deletion of James Valitchka

Comment: without prejudice against recreation if somebody can write something better than this with the genuinely reliable sources. I recall engaging with this article before — I thought in fact that it had been ''deleted'' before, but it turns out I just revert-warred for a couple of days 13 years ago with the subject when he tried to turn it into a piece of advertorial self-promotion instead of a proper encyclopedia article. But that does demonstrate that there has been |conflict of interest editing here which indeed leaves real doubt about whether everything in it is actually true. The problem is that the strongest notability claim (bestsellerdom) is entirely |unverifiable (I'm having no better luck than anybody else above), and the listed awards are ''not'' major literary awards (GG, Giller, Griffin, Writers Trust) that would clinch "inherently notable because award" for a writer, and the overwhelming majority of the footnotes present here are unreliable |primary sources that are not support for notability at all. Is it possible that somebody could genuinely do better? I don't know, but I won't say never. Is ''this'' good enough ''as is''? Not by a long shot
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:V||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES)