Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Titus


 * 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. Evidently not notable enough for inclusion. —  Aitias  // discussion 23:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Mark Titus

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

This is a well-written article, but the attention this person has gained from this blog has largely been local. Google produces about 4,000 hits, but aside from one link to CNN, it's all local press, forums, and Wordpress. Cue the Strings (talk) 05:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Insufficient notability. ChildofMidnight (talk) 14:42, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

User: Anonymous Mark Titus is blowing up if you aren't paying attention. His blog now has over 100,000 hits and about 80,000 have come in the past two days. Give him a chance before you pull this deletion crap —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.236.245.128 (talk) 15:42, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — 63.236.245.128 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep Well written article. Titus's blog is getting some serious exposure on sports.yahoo.com and also by "The sports guy" Bill Simmons.  My vote is that the article stays. Redrocket55 (talk) 15:05, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — Redrocket55 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:03, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Mark Titus is attracting attention from people all over America, and even in Europe, as proven by a comment left on one of his blog entries by a European basketball player. Also, basketball players from universities other that The Ohio State University have praised and encouraged his blogging. A young man with such talent should be documented. Mark Titus has a future in writing and I feel that a Wikipedia article can help track his life and career. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.239.43.121 (talk) 04:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — 24.239.43.121 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep If there is a sports-only version of wikipedia, I concede fully that Mr. Titus' entry belongs there. But in my opinion, his contributions to the blog-revolution are perhaps as important as all you wikipediists' contributions to the wiki-revolution and they need to be recorded.  Please keep the entry! Kingpin (talk) 00:38, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — Martinhurn (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

"keep" The blog is so good that in no time Titus will have National recognition. I heard a rumor that he's possibly going to be a guest on the Jim Rome show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.253.36.175 (talk) 02:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — 68.253.36.175 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * With all due respect to the IP commenters, can some registered users speak up? I'm just not sure how far Titus's contributions to the blogsophere have been recognized other than from fellow sports bloggers and one national supporter.  There are an unlimited number of talented bloggers out there who get thousands of hits a day - but just because you're a strong writer doesn't mean your work merits an encyclopedia article, and Wikipedia isn't a stepping stone to help bolster your career.  I don't mean to imply that this article is being used for personal gain, but I haven't really seen a case made yet for his notability other than the fact that Yahoo supports him.  - Cue the Strings (talk) 05:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisting comment This AFD seems to have attracted comments from new editors. Their input is welcome but this discussion could use some input from experienced editors. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep It's Christmas. Might be worth clarifying the "trillion" goal / linking to relevant basketball rules articles 81.152.129.12 (talk) 01:34, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — 81.152.129.12 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Bah, Humbug!! MuZemike  ( talk ) 03:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak delete There's a certain paradox in obtaining notability for being utterly unnotable. I'd require a good deal more attention from mainstream media for an article here. And ""keep" The blog is so good that in no time Titus will have National recognition." a little above, is of course an argument for deletion until he does perhaps have recognition. DGG (talk) 03:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep — Notwithstanding the flood of single-purpose accounts and/or meatpuppets above, I come up with a couple of sources from gNews that can minimally establish notability of this blogger. MuZemike  ( talk ) 03:44, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Put quotes around the name and then check the false positives. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 21:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know. This looks like the Mark Titus we are discussing about here and here. MuZemike  ( talk ) 23:53, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Two links don't do it. In addition, I couldn't find his name mentioned in any of these links. The articles are about certain games in which he might have played a part, and it thus mentioned. In any case, it does not satisfy the "significant coverage" required by WP:BIO. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 05:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. See above.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 21:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Without better sourcing, this must be deleted. Bearian&#39;sBooties (talk) 21:15, 29 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.