Deletion of Francis Lucille

Comment: Fails . The cited sources are non-RS websites or books published by minor presses. The subject's own books are themselves non-notable; a worldcat search shows that ''http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/298502142&referer=brief_results Eternity Now'' is carried by only 1 library (in Singapore), while his other English books are not carried by any library! Typically even obscure books can be found in 10-100s of libraries; consider for example Rod Dreher, whose bio was up for a recent contentious AFD; his book ''Crunchy Cons'' is found in 3077 libraries listed on Worldcat
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: It seems very fishy to me that the majority of keep votes are from brand new  accounts which appear to be created for the sole purpose of voting: Special:Log/Advaitastudent|Advaitastudent (Special:Contributions/Advaitastudent|contribs), Special:Log/Patyogi|Patyogi (Special:Contributions/Patyogi|contribs), Special:Log/Mishvs|Mishvs (Special:Contributions/Mishvs|contribs). Checking the logs there are two others whos votes were deleted (due to the fact that the were verbatim copies of one another?): Special:Log/Advaitalover|Advaitalover (Special:Contributions/Advaitalover|contribs) and Special:Log/Mvs 82|Mvs 82 (Special:Contributions/Mvs 82|contribs). At the very least it smells like , and at worst it looks like 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:MEAT||WP:SOCK)

Comment: there's nothing here that even aspires to notability per our GNG and specific guidelines at . The "sources" are all self-interested
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: The article doesn't include a single reliable source. Totally fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: Amarhindustani, please, if you have additional information pointing to the notability of the article, add it to the article and note in here that you've added material. If this is notable, we need to know on what grounds it holds up to the |notability guidelines here on Wikipedia.  Please, enlighten us
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Notable per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: Does not seem to have been the subject of multiple, independant articles per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: no independent, non-trivial coverage by reliable sources at all about this spiritualist. Works self-published, and no other indications of wide fame, acclaim or infamy. Clearly fails . Wikipedia is not advertising
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)