Deletion of Richard La Ruina

Comment: the minor controversy does not overcome the fact that the subject is non-notable, sources are passing mentions and / or SPIP, such as the "Q&A". The article is mostly promo 'cruft, and  applies
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSPAM)

Comment: Special:Contributions/86.57.172.38|86.57.172.38 if there is a , as suspected by Macktheknifeau's WHOIS report, then the user should state it. Additionally, I don't see how removing this article would be "discrimination." Not to be too reading into the users motivations, people can establish their notability through controversy but they can also advertise through it as well. We should consider if this all for 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:PROMO)

Comment: Mr La Ruina has been condemned by Sony who have blocked his "super seducer" game from being released on the Playstation as it is offensive and misogynistic, and promotes stalking. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sony-blocks-sleazy-super-seducer-game-after-backlash-qw96rrltn https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/7/17091066/playstation-store-super-seducer-game This is the main topic when searching for sources, so it should be the main focus of his article, not a small paragraph at the end. I've got no real issue if the article is deleted, but keeping it and rewriting it to a |neutral point of view using ''proper'' sources will teach people that |an article about yourself is nothing to be proud of
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:PROUD)