Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Influencer marketing
Forgive me for turning around your deletion rationale, but aren't you stretching the definition of |original research somewhat? OR refers to ''unpublished'' facts or syntheses (emphasis mine). Yes, caution is to be exerted if an editor cites |his own book. But first, there are numerous other refs in the article, and second, I would like to see an evaluation of the respectability of the publisher before having the book disqualified as a reliable source. (Even then, one could maybe check how much of the article could stay without citing this book). As for the implicit |CoI accusation, don't we here have the rare case of a subject expert editing his expert topic? That's not necessarily bad, I daresay
— User:Pgallert, 10:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:OR||WP:SPS||WP:COI (Wikipedia:No original research)