Deletion of Nicholas Kralev

Comment: how can a 300 word article have over 50 references, a case of 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Citation overkill (WP:OVERCITE)

Comment: having gone through the article's references, most of them show that the subject has done a lot (present refs 4 to 47}, in line with 3. first part of  - "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work.", but none of those references are useable for the second part of 3. - "In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." (instead the article looks like a , i know this doesn't mean the subject is not notable.) Refs 1 to 3 do discuss/review one of his books - ''America's Other Army'', so that book may warrant its own article, but it appears not so for the author
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE||WP:RESUME)