Deletion of Subjective universe

Comment: two sources ''by', not about'' the subject.  Completely lacking |reliable sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: See my above comments to all of the "Keep" !votes above.  This article has no independent sources published in reliable sources that directly address the subject (see http://books.google.com/books?oe=utf-8&client=iceweasel-a&um=1&q=Daegene+Song+%22subjective+universe%22&btnG=Search+Books books, http://scholar.google.com/scholar?oe=utf-8&client=iceweasel-a&um=1&q=Daegene%20Song%20%22subjective%20universe%22&sa=N&hl=en&tab=ps scholar, http://news.google.com/news?oe=utf-8&client=iceweasel-a&um=1&q=Daegene%20Song%20%22subjective%20universe%22&hl=en&sa=N&tab=sn news).  Reliable third-party coverage is needed, per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: This is borderline, because the paper is new and hasn't picked up much attention (at least not yet); however, Daegene Song is a legitimately published researcher, and it seems that the intent of  is to prevent amateur yahoos like myself from writing articles about our own crazy theories, not Oxford Ph.D's. Plus, his idea is incredibly interesting and even potentially revolutionary. So in this case I say let it slide
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)