Deletion of B. Scott

Comment: I was sufficiently stung by the above suggestion that I went back and tried to look at the article from scratch, identifying the claims for |notability and holding them up against the relevant policy statements.  I still don't see a reason to change my !vote for deletion, although I admit there is more there than I saw by only tracing a representative sample of the links.  This individual may have notability when his career approaches the level of Perez Hilton, whom I believe has achieved notability by being the subject of references/quotes/allusions in other media; right now, it's self-publication -- at a very high level of self-publication, but self-publication nevertheless -- and my understanding of self–publication in any medium is that it does not confer notability.  If someone has policy to cite, I'd be pleased to hear it; I think this might be a case where policy doesn't entirely cover the situation, because this type of potential notability is so new and unusual, but I just cannot see how true notablity attaches to this type of self-promotional activity.  I'm also concerned that Wikipedia might be being used as an advertising vehicle in this type of situation
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)