Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Day (2nd nomination)
I'm bemused that this wasn't simply speedy deleted. On seeing that the article had been recreated I had assumed that there was new content and/or refs which indicated the subject was now notable. If there is such material, I'm afraid it has eluded me. The number of refs is so vast I have not checked them all, or whether they simply correspond to those used before, but they seem to be overwhelmingly from unreliable sources and/or to make minimal mention of the subject. This is so much the case that it may help the case of the article's advocates to shovel out the dross refs to see if any of value remain. I can't see anything substantial that has changed since I nominated it for deletion last October, so I may as well repeat the spiel: "Apparently fails  and . Vast no. of refs but overwhelmingly from subjects own web sites and ones directly associated with him, blogs, other self-published sites, minor or very indirect (or even apparent non-) mentions
— User:Doddy, 20:37, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:ENT (Wikipedia:Notability)