Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Tilley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 05:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Matt Tilley

Matt Tilley (discussion|history|protect|delete|undelete|logs|links)

Delete: The page is a perfect example of unencyclopedic information. The subject is of dubious notability and the article reads like a résumé. Users who are predominantly editing this page seem to be relying on subject's agency and promotional websites as sources. --Mike121212 08:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC) — Mike121212 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Keep. Jo Stanley gets an entry, all other radio presenters get an entry, why do you want to delete it? Most pages about radio presenters look like resumes, do you know how hard it is to write a bio like this and make it not at all look like a resume? Charlie Somerville 10:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Looks good to me. The sources could use a bit more variety, but that's fixable - and the biographical notability looks fine to me. Zetawoof(ζ) 08:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep a notable comedian and radio presenter. --Dan027 09:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Well known comedian in Melbourne and around Australia. The article has just had some major upgrades with numerous new sources and enough is known about him to warrant his own article. There are many other biography articles that are in more doubt for deletion than this one thats for sure. --Lakeyboy 10:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - for reasons noted above --Evan C (Talk) 10:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per above. --Flex (talk|contribs) 11:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete The cites in the article appear to show that he is a local radio and TV personality in 1 town in Australia who had a record which was a local hit. There is a passing reference in the local paper a national paper. The cites are mostly local fansites. No real evidence of notability in the form of multiple independent national mainstream press coverage. We cannot have an article for everyone who ever had a radio or TV show in the world, (hey I had one) unless they meet WP:N. Edison 17:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    The "local paper" you speak of is the number one selling newspaper in Australia and the "town" is the second largest city in the country. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 06:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Still lacks multiple independent press coverage. Is there the equivalent of Variety (magazine) or Billboard (magazine) in Australia? Why aren't there more press articles in major Australian papers? For an example of a DJ in the U.S. who did humor and got national press, see Howard Stern or Steve Dahl. This article still does not show much to confirm his status and to distinguish him from hundreds of other broadcasting personalities who are non-notable. Edison 18:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Seems notable to me after a cursory google search, his album appears to be more than just a 'local hit' via Tilley's album "Hot Cereal" hits #4 on the national charts and has gone gold in Australia. Tilley's not a musician, but he is a performer whose work competes with musicians and per WP:MUSIC would pass notability criterion "Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one large or medium-sized country." JGardner 19:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep he did considerable broadcast presentation work, and had a charted song. It;s good enough for me.-- danntm T C 19:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per JGardner's comments. Seems to be of interest to a small locale only. -Amatulic 21:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Abstain. After thinking about it more, I'm changing my vote, neither for nor against. -Amatulic 21:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - the guy has a gold album, which by itself is sufficient for notability. Beyond that, Melbourne has a metro are population of 3.7 million so this isn't a small market radio station he works at. And finally, references are provided. -- Whpq 21:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - clearly needs cleanup and good sourcing, but theres no reason for deletion. Clamster5 00:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. There are 176 hits from Ebbsco's Australia and New Zealand media database. His album is on the Australian charts at number 13 between Chris Isaak and the Pussycat Dolls. Co-host of a popular radio program in Australia for a number of years. Capitalistroadster 01:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- and cleanup. - Longhair\talk 02:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep notable comedian. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 02:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - notably unfunny "comedian". Lankiveil 03:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC).
  • Keep - can't stand the guy, but plenty notable enough (in the tiny village of Melbourne anyway). --Canley 05:27, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. It is difficult to assume good faith when the first thing a new user does is nominate something notable for deletion. Yamaguchi先生 05:45, 9 November 2006
  • Keep A step in notability above Nokia phone models and 90 year old porn actresses, so until they go, he can stay. --Michael Johnson 12:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
A lot more people are interested than phone models than Matt Tilley. They affect a GREAT deal more people. Also Michael, love the logic you use that wikipedia should be equally weak across the board. Worst.Vote.Comments.Ever. --Mike121212 02:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, come on, mate! Be civil! --Canley 05:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep sounds like he's been on TV enough to be notable at least down under. --nascarfan1 20:50, 11 November 2006 (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.