Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Campagna (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Tone 14:07, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Matt Campagna
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Semi-advertorialized WP:AUTOBIO of a filmmaker, not making any strong claim to passage of WP:CREATIVE or citing any particularly strong reliable sources to secure notability per WP:GNG. The most visible attempt at a notability claim here is that one of his films won a minor "Best Short Film" award at a science fiction convention -- but "notable because award" for a filmmaker requires important awards on the order of the Oscars or the BAFTAs or the Canadian Screen Awards that get media coverage, not just any small fry film award that can be "referenced" solely to its own self-published content about itself because real media journalism about the award ceremony is non-existent. And other than that, this is firmly in "notable because his work exists" territory, which still requires real sources. But the referencing here is almost entirely to directly affiliated primary sources -- the only real media references shown at all are a dead link that never actually provided the proper citation details in order for us to retrieve it and verify what it did or didn't say; one short blurb in a magazine which namechecks his existence without being about him to any non-trivial degree; and one wire service article which isn't enough all by itself if it's the only substantive source on offer. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced much, much better than this. Note that Wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards have been tightened up considerably in the past decade, precisely because the standards of the early 2010s left us too vulnerable to spammy self-promotion — so the fact that the first discussion closed as a "keep" is not a permanent injunction against reconsidering it now. Consensus can change, after all. Bearcat (talk) 01:46, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 01:46, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 01:46, 14 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete for our rules against autobiographies to have any teeth we must delete whenever we find them.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:53, 18 September 2020 (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.