Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Markoff


 * 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. JForget 00:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Matthew Markoff

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested PROD (and PROD2). Self-promotional autobiography. Poorly referenced and not wholly verifiable. Not clear that being 8th best at a particular trading card game confers notability. See the talk page for contesting comments by the author. He does not deny that it is autobiographical but sets out some reasons why he believes he should be considered notable. DanielRigal (talk) 22:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —DanielRigal (talk) 22:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - I see forum posts and blog posts, but not the significant coverage that woul establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 20:58, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable autobiographical entry. --mhking (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment [] is probably a RS. I honestly suspect this guy is notable given the rather large coverage he does have in blogs and youtube.  I also suspect he's got coverage in paper TCG magazines.  But I'm not finding enough at the moment. Hobit (talk) 13:19, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable. Most Google hits are not about this guy, but about an (apparently more notable) actor and/or a rap artist by the same name. Refining the search to add "warcraft" narrows the field but produces no reliable sources. BTW based on his comments on the talk page, the writer/subject seems not to understand that Wikipedia has standards. He takes the attitude that he should be able to write whatever he wants and if we don't like it, don't read it. He needs to read WP:N and understand that it's not a free-for-all here. --MelanieN (talk) 14:46, 25 March 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.