Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Stadlen


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Matthew Stadlen

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Their seems to be very little evidence that Stadlen is notable. The only sources given which are specifically about him are written by him. Some of the handful of sources that are included have been added by an account called "Matthewstadlen". Also, the article was created by an account "Richay01" with no edits to any other pages which could also be associated with Stadlen. Llewee (talk) 21:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, Photography,  and England.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:52, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Only sources found are articles he's penned, , appears to be a working journalist, no different than most. Oaktree b (talk) 22:50, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete This one seems like an easy call. In addition to the fact that there is very little evidence to support him as notable, and little to no WP:RS coverage of his life or career, there is likely a WP:COI case to be made with the editor and sources used in the article. I vote strong delete for these reasons. Go4thProsper (talk) 12:55, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:51, 8 July 2023 (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.