Deletion of Dr. Carl Marci

Comment: per .  He's |hardly mentioned in several of the sources cited, such as the ''New York Times'', ''Boston.com'', and ''Psychology Today''.  In a few of the sources, he and his ideas are not even mentioned: see the ''Wall Street Journal'', ''Ad Age'', ''Media Week'', and ''Popular Science''.  That makes me want to throw  out the door.  Only one source actually quotes Marci more than once: the ''Wired'' article.  Even then, they really just quote him, and don't even describe (except in geek-jargon) what makes him notable. It's possible that a decent stub could be created, but this needs a lot more work. Right now, a reasonable argument could be made to |blow it up and start over
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BARE||WP:SIGCOV||WP:AGF||WP:TNT)

Comment: for lack of the ''significance'' of most of the coverage in independent reliable sources, noted above. I agree he fails  and that the test of his notability should be  which ends up meaning 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF||WP:BIO||WP:GNG)