Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mar Omega


 * 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. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 13:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Mar Omega

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:BIO; little or no media coverage, no notability indicated, no 3rd party references. 4I7.4I7 10:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Also very poorly structured and formatted, does not read like an encyclopedic entry. Luinfana (talk) 14:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure If I am responding in the correct area as I am new to Wikipedia. Please help me to reformat the page so it is closer to the correct format. Mar Omega has had media coverage and I am trying very hard to obtain the rest of it. It is mainly is newspapers. Some 3rd party references I included were code one auto and Freak. I would like to keep this article from being deleted if possible, please give some more advice on how I could improve it. Mar Omega is not known "world wide" But he is decently known across the U.S. and very well known in the NJ/NY/PA as well as Tx/OK area.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.250.23.67 (talk) 15:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I am the author of this article. As far as national television is concerned, Mar Omega was interviewed by Don Imus on the MSNBC / WFAN morning show, Imus in the Morning back in November of 2006. His trademarks were boldly and intentionally featured on props that he loaned Jim Cramer on the CNBC hit show, Jim Cramer's MAD MONEY in March 2008. I've asked Mr. Omega for the exact air dates and he said he needed a day or two to find that in the archives since MSNBC moved from NJ to Manhattan.

Mar Omega worked on the Iron-Man movie released in 2008, however the credit given was for the entire CNBC crew who worked on the scene. Because he didn't receive an individual credit in the Iron-Man movie, I will not use the fact that he worked on the movie as leverage for notability, but once again it is an example of his work seen world-wide.


 * It seems to me that you in fact are trying to use this claim as leverage for notability, else why bring it up? --CalendarWatcher (talk) 08:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Being where Mar Omega has a growing cult following of 5000+ fans, and has been featured on national television, this article will adequately meet the standards of notability when these facts are updated. I will also include a more "list oriented" filmography and possibly a list of published works.

This Wikipedia entry will be an ongoing work in progress until everyone here and the person it's being written about are completely satisfied.

Thank you for your consideration Boiyer2 (talk) 02:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not meet guidelines for inclusion. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. There's a lot of puffery, but not much evidence. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 08:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  freshacconci  talk talk  10:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete there may be a claim for notability buried somewhere in the article but I can't find it. It is possible that they are notable but this article doesn't demonstrate it so I'm voting for deleting it although the editor who started it might want to save a copy to their sandbox and work on it there, honing it down until it focuses on the most important aspects, rather than throwing everything in. As it stands it reads like a resume and one for someone who isn't currently notable. My gut tells me there is potential here that the article doesn't currently demonstrate. My gut isn't enough for a keep vote though. (Emperor (talk) 15:55, 15 December 2008 (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.