Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Norman

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 16:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Matt Norman

Matt Norman (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

Speedied three times as A7 and reposted every time, taken to DRV, reposted again during DRV process, WP:PRODded, and the re-creator removed the PROD tags. All creations are the work of WP:SPA User:Filmnews2007, whose mission on WIkipedia appears to be to promote this film, the maker of which is personally known to him. His statement on my Talk is that this will change the way events are viewed. So it might, but we can't be part of that process per policy. Consensus at DRV is to AfD this, so here it is. I say get it gone until a neutral third party shows an interest. Guy (Help!) 12:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete as per nom.Maustrauser 12:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. 206.138.130.2 13:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:BIO as there do not seem to be reliable third-party sources that discuss Matt Norman as their primary subject. In any case, we should not be tolerating pages written with such an obvious conflict of interest. Pascal.Tesson 14:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, listed as a film-maker, but no films to his credit. Famous uncles are irrelevant. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 15:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Robertissimo 15:27, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Unacceptable abuse of process by the creator, even if the subject were notable. --Dhartung | Talk 21:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, subject is non-notable at the time being, as JzG has explained. The author seems to be an new editor trying to do the right thing and has asked for help; I don't think there was malicious intent here (just a few poor decisions). Hopefully the explanation I provided to him here, along with that of JzG directly above it, will convince him to reign in his efforts without biting him. Tijuana Brass 21:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Only real assertion of notability still fails WP:CRYSTAL. --Dweller 12:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.