Deletion of Nassim Haramein (2nd nomination)

Comment: Patently fails  and , wee bit of a , no usable sources which would permit construction of a useful, neutral encyclopedia article, and the subject of edit-warring to boot. Previous AfD should almost certainly have been closed as "delete"; many of the same points were raised there, and have not been addressed
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF||WP:COATRACK)

Comment: per nom and the comments of others above. Does not pass either  or . No evidence of substantial citability or reviews of his work in scholarly publications; much of his work appears to be self-published; no significant newscoverage. As noted by Nomoskedasticity, the subject's book is only held by a few academic libraries. No other evidence of passing either  or  that I can see
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO||WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: Clearly fails . The validity or lack thereof of his ideas is not important here, but more important is that a Google search does not really come up with independent verifiable sources establishing notability. Hence also fails  and . The main purpose of the article seems to be the promotion of his 4 DVD set, which is mentioned several times
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:FRINGE||WP:BIO)

Comment: Does not satisfy .  The only notability guideline he might concievably satisfy is , per "originating a significant new concept, theory or technique". If this theory were truly significant, it would be discussed in mainstream peer-reviewed publications and not in a bare smattering of self-published and non-mainstream sources.  Until it is, then it cannot confer  on its originator
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:CREATIVE||WP:N)