Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew J. Sadler


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:45, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Matthew J. Sadler

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Non-notable poet. No references given and no sources found to show he passes notability for creative professionals. Triwbe (talk) 06:39, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions.  —Triwbe (talk) 06:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  —Triwbe (talk) 06:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —Triwbe (talk) 17:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Disagree: WP:AUTHOR - No. 3.  Several verifiable sources have been referenced, and an independent work from this author is forthcoming. Jmoyryla (talk) 02:05, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It appears that all the sources in the article are links to works by the subject of the article. Are there reliable secondary sources, articles, or reviews about the author or his work as outlined in the notability guideline you referenced? VQuakr (talk) 02:17, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I will look into this. I'm working with the poet to track down more sources.  Apparently former poet laureate Billy Collins has commented on Sadler's work.  Thanks for the suggestions - Jmoyryla (talk) 03:07, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * If you are working with the subject of the article then this constitues a clear conflict of interest and now looks to me like your aim is to promote his new book. --Triwbe (talk) 06:08, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete, adding a !vote to my reasoning above: lack of secondary coverage. VQuakr (talk) 06:31, 15 November 2010 (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.