Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Blatt


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 19:26, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Kevin Blatt

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article appears like a vanity page WP:COI, contains content that is written like an advertisement. Subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies WP:GNG and doesn't have WP:SIGCOV from reliable secondary sources. Also as per WP:CREATIVE: The person is 'not regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors, with no real claim to fame. Does not satisfy criteria for Subjects notable only for one event: WP:BLP1E. Lethweimaster (talk) 13:47, 7 August 2023 (UTC) Lethweimaster (talk) 13:47, 7 August 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 16:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sexuality and gender,  and Ohio.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep There seems to be a lot of coverage of the person, and . Not sure he's a fixer, appears to be a "leaker", but that's another discussion altogether. Oaktree b (talk) 22:49, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak Keep The article definitely needs improvements, many lines are subjective and definitely appear to come off as a Conflict of Interest (being referred to as a "fixer" seems ostentatious and being known for "outrageous stories" isn't really substantiated) - but he does seem to have a few articles that would constitute significant coverage (at least two where he is the main focus, one of which from Vice, a major news outlet). However, I would agree that he does not fall under the definition of being "regarded as an important figure or widely cited by peers or successors". A MINOTAUR (talk) 17:24, 14 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. Depressingly, the subject of the article does actually have enough significant coverage from reliable sources to meet the threshold of notability - the New York Magazine piece, the Wired piece, the Cleveland Plain Dealer article, and arguably the NBC piece. Also, he's kept in front of the media for a long time, so WP:BLP1E doesn't apply.  As the old saying goes, nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the public. Fiachra10003 (talk) 00:49, 18 August 2023 (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.