Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew W. Gassen


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 05:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Matthew W. Gassen

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

Advert-like article of non-notable person. Unable to find any significant coverage in independent reliable sources. References cited are:
 * http://www.cjonline.com/stories/120108/loc_362145834.shtml. Passing mention of appointment to planning commission.


 * http://matthewgassen.com/page6/page6.html. Subject's own web site.
 * http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewgassen. Subject's own LinkedIn page.
 * http://news.sympatico.msn.ca/Ecoluxury+retailer+Juno++Jove+succeeds+where+others+have+failed/GloballyMinded/ContentPosting?isfa=1&newsitemid=e098f87e-eeb2-4f19-8ef7-f7c34deff0c8&feedname=RETHOS&show=False&number=0&showbyline=True&subtitle=&detect=&abc=abc&date=True Article. written by the subject about a company for which the subject served as an executive.
 * http://www.matthewgassen.com. Subject's own web site.
 * http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/55002739/abstract. Refence to a book of unknown relevance to the article. The claim seems to be that subject's work was included in the book, which is not a criterion for notability.
 * Actually it refers to a journal, specifically an article on a meeting, which doesn't require scientific standing to write or have accepted. If it was a textbook or actual scientific article, it might well have contributed to notability.- Mgm|(talk) 00:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * http://www.playbackstl.com/content/view/1163/162/. Broken link of unknown relevance.
 * http://news-info.wustl.edu/web/page/normal/3834.html. Subject listed as a contact for MTV's Rock the Vote.
 * http://www.rethos.com/mgassen. Broken link seemingly demonstrating that the subject has written freelance articles for various publications, which is not a criterion for notability.

Bongo matic  23:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Reads like a resume, fluffy and cuddly. How in the world are we to get a balanced view of this person? If the fluff were removed, Most notably, conducting his studies abroad entirely in French - Matt's interests are still varied, the article would be a stub. How is he notable? Aside from the Kansas board appointment? Do we want an article on every appointment to every board of every political body? Maybe some of the keep arguments will change my mind. --72.87.165.137 (talk) 07:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No reliables sources to establish notability. The references provided in the article are not sufficient to establish notability, and in some cases, are self-published and as such aren't necessarily reliable. -- Whpq (talk) 21:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * comment I contacted Gassen's website asking for any possible sources or notable projects he's worked on, I'll let you know the results ASAP, but I do ask that we hold off closing this until we can check any sources I am referred to. Tealwisp (talk) 00:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per guidelines. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 20:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep First of all, never can we forget that we have been instructed to ignore all rules when they stop us from improving the project. Second, I've heard back from Mr. Gassen, who has directed me to the first source listed on this page.  Upon review, I would say that the article, at the very least, does provide enough notability to keep the article, especially under WP:IAR, which is policy, and therefore overrides the guidelines of WP:RS, which does not say anything about needing significant coverage; the word "coverage" does not even appear in the guideline.  We can all agree that this is not a vanity page, nor is it a malicious page of any kind.  If a policy or guideline prevents us from keeping this article, which we know can contribute, then we must ignore the guideline.  Should these undeniable truths be denied by an administrator, at least let me take the page into userspace and clean it, source it, and expand it until it can survive the this harsh wikiworld.  In fact, given the state of the article, I would put up with it being moved to my userspace for a little while so we can make it better.  Tealwisp (talk) 23:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't believe anything prevents you from copying the page to your user space now or any time until the page is deleted. By the way, it is not WP:RS that requires coverage to be significant, but WP:N. Bongo  matic  23:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:N is a guideline. That means that it is superseded by policy, such as WP:IAR.  Thank you very much, If there are no further questions, I think we can call this closed, with a decision to keep.  My point about userspace was simply that I think this article is definitely worth keeping, though some may not share my views on the legitimacy of wikipedia's policy, and if they deleted the article, I would like to keep it and make it more keepable.  Tealwisp (talk) 01:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete the relevant policy is that the content of wikipedia has to be encyclopedic, which means in this context that a person who is the subject of an article must be notable, and this has to be demonstrated. At this point in his career, I don't see anything which in any reasonable way would justify that: various not particularly remarkable student activities and earning a law degree is not by itself appropriate significance for an encyclopedia entry, nor is work as one of the executives of a department store, nor is being on the sustainability advisory board of a small city. When he has completed " devoting his additional time to developing a course of study for educating others on sustainability and corporate responsibility." and the work is published and the subject of multiple stories in major news sources, then there will be occasion for an article. I speedy deleted an earlier version,but it was recreated. I am not altogether sure I would regard the material as suitable for userspace. WP is not for self-advertising. Any applicable use of IAR in this case would be to keep the article out of Wikipedia. DGG (talk) 02:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I hate to repeat myself, but notability is a guideline, a subset of Verifiability, and if you wish to point to WP:NOT, I'll have to point to the same thing, as it says within WP:NOT that wikipedia is not governed by statute (the point of Ignore All Rules). This article is the occasional exception mentioned in the header of guidelines' pages.  Tealwisp (talk) 02:56, 6 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.