Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-Newtonian calculus (2nd nomination)
This is a tough call. The article seems to consist mostly of justifications for itself so to me the issue is whether is anything to be saved from it. There are serious self-promotion issues here as well, as pointed out above, and I would like to suggest that people who write about their own work on WP are not following the spirit of the project and should desist. The  guideline is meant to prevent this type of behavior. Nevertheless, that issue is independent of whether the subject meets notability guidelines etc. Part of the problem here is that most of the article seems to be about the book ''Non-Newtonian Calculus'' rather than it's subject. Notability for the book or the related articles has not been established since the requirement is that it should have a lasting and significant impact in the field; lists of reviews are not sufficient for this. The book can be used as a reference, but the issue for the material is whether it has been picked up and passed on by other authors, in other words secondary sources. Doing the relevant web searches I found many hits, but all could be traced back to the same two or three authors associated with the original work. So I'm forced to concluded that the material here is based solely on primary sources. WP is an encyclopedia and so its content should based on secondary sources and I see no evidence that this material meets that criterion
— User:RDBury, 03:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:COI (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest)