" 

 ==advice== 
 The article was proposed for deletion by another editor, but he neglected to notify you: The reason given was: "" contravening orders of the New Zealand High Court; defamation of living persons; self-promotion; breaches Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons""   

 As reviewing administrator, I  have declined to delete it, on the ground that the case is notable, since the NZ Supreme Court has accepted it for review, , we do not censor on the basis of court orders that have no effect in the US,  & the other problems are fixable. However,  it will undoubtedly be nominated for regular deletion, and you need to make some improvements immediately: Please read WP:BLP. n particular: 
 ::every specific statement about a person must be sourced to a third party source.  For a controversial statement, it needs to be a published article in a news source, or a court judgmentnot the allegations in a brief or a statement by a party to the case. Reviews of his book in reliable publications are good sources; the book itself is not.  Negative comment about him and  about other parties must be very carefully handled. Only facts must be stated, not unsourced editorializing about them.  Siemers comments of the judges are particularly problematic . It is my impression that an article of a paragraph or two might be more acceptable here, but nobody can predict the result of a WP:Articles for Deletion debate."