Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Kitces (2nd nomination)
The new WSJ article is indeed valid editorial coverage, and yes, you must refer to the editorial coverage, not your original research. That's how Wikipedia works, plain and simple. Although I wouldn't call your coverage "repeated" yet, you can now say it has continued. I've edited the article to remove all of your original research, references to your own blogs and employer site, and unsubstantiated fluff, like accolades. If you can live with this streamlined article, which more closely adheres to Wikipedia standards (ie referencing your personal website & CV is verboten), I personally can overlook the borderline notability, despite being . If you insist on adding exponential fluff to borderline notability, I and I expect others, are driven to be policy sticklers
— User:Nixie9, 15:41, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:TOOSOON (Wikipedia:Too soon)