Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Trundle
The ''Fate Magazine'' and ''Cincinnati Post'' references are clearly independant coverage of his writings, whether those are self-published or not.  He probably doesn't meet  but those two articles ought to earn him the minimum level of notability needed for a keep under  as an author.  The remaining problem is the  concern that led to this administrative nomination.  Nothing in the article ''seems'' to fall within its demense, however.  The ufology material is potentially controversial, but it is strongly sourced.  The remaining material is not controversial, nor is it "details of his personal life."  Furthermore, the caveats of 's section on the "Presumption in favor of privacy" for "Non-public figures" seem to be met.  To wit, the article's content clearly exercises restraint, disincludes material from primary sources not covered in verifiable secondary sources, and is not "sensationalistic" or "titilating."   is designed to shield people against misinformation and attacks, but I do not believe it is meant as a blanket means to hide otherwise-notable material from the wider world, at least not as the policy currently is worded (cf. Talk: Angela Beesley
— User:Serpent, 08:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:PROF||WP:BIO||WP:BLP||WP:BLP||WP:BLP (Wikipedia:Notability)