Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matty G the Musician


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  01:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Matty G the Musician

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

Contested prod, removed by anon IP. Article is about a non-notable musician. It cites no reliable secondary sources, and is largely promotional for the subject. The creating editor is User:MattyGtheMusician, which suggests a conflict of interest. Article fails WP:N, WP:RS. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, and (though not in itself grounds for outright deletion) WP:COI and WP:NPOV. - Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 16:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.--CyberGhostface (talk) 03:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Self-taught self-promoter. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 07:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete. Sources are all Valid OldManMoses (talk) 20:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC) — OldManMoses (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep It!. Yes I did start this article and I am Matty G, but before you just say "Delete, delete, delete", why don't you check ANY of the 30 sources that I've linked? They prove that I've been published and endorsed many times by a bunch of credible web pages, magazines, etc. and even a few celebrities. It's all right there. Just check it and you will see I promise you! Please just don't say "Delete" without checking them out because that is wrong. This article is not intended for self-promotion. I'm not selling anything and even if you do ignore the facts and delete this article, I guarantee you that someone else is going to write an article about me in the near future and it's because I'm notable. MattyGtheMusician (talk) 21:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC) — MattyGtheMusician (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete There's nothing wrong with being self-taught - I am on most of my instruments. However, this whole thing strikes me as promotional material backed mainly with references to blogs. The performance has an originality that must not be confused with notability. A skate-boarding budgie makes it into the papers. Is it notable? No. Will this last? I believe not. If it does, someone will write an article. An independent article - 'about' rather than 'by'. Peridon (talk) 23:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It!. Then in your line of thinking, Peridon, and with all due respect, that would mean that Zack Kim, the man who plays 2 guitars at the same time, or Greg Patillo, the man who beatboxes while playing the flute, are both original but not notable, and yet they have articles on wikipedia. Is there any difference between the originality of those two musicians and myself? Yes, they are definitely more notable than I am, but I am in the same category as they are. And most importantly, I still fulfill Wikipedia's criteria. You say that my sources are mostly self-published blogs, and that is simply not true, with all due respect. I did not put myself on those web sites- other people did, and in many cases without my permission. I only found out that I was on those sites months later after finding them on Google, or having a friend tell me they saw my video posted on CollegeHumor.com or Destructoid.com, or Instinct Magazine, or the Iona College Newspaper, etc. And as for the credibilty of those sources, for example, CollegeHumor has a television show debuting on MTV this season, and the staff at that organization nationally showcased me twice on their well-known web page in the last 2 years. The sources are all there. This is kind of like me trying to buy something that costs 5 dollars, and I'm holding out a 5 dollar bill, and yet the Wikipedia employees are telling me that I don't have enough money. It's all right there. Please try to be understanding. And once again, I'm not selling anything. All of the information is non-commercial and factual. With that in mind, will it really make a difference if the article was started by me as opposed to someone else? If someone not named "MattyGtheMusician" started this article, would it change all of the perfectly good evidence in the links that "MattyGtheMusician" is notable? MattyGtheMusician (talk) 23:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Blogs are not reliable sources no matter who posted there. I haven't time to check all your references. The ones I picked (at random) were blogs, apart from one which gave a one line mention. Greg Patillo? I can't see where it says he plays the flute AND beatboxes. Two hands are needed for the flute. (It'll fall down otherwise, as well as needing fingers to stop holes.) I suspect he beatboxes the sound of the flute, just as Bobby McFerrin produces a group of instrumental sounds. Zack Kim does play two guitars, but not in conventional style. His article needs better referencing. But Wikipedia doesn't work on 'He's got one, so I can have one too'. Your article is too promotional for me. Wait till you get notable - someone will write an article. If you can't get notable without an article, sorry - Wikipedia isn't for boosting people up the ladder. It's for recording those who've climbed up, been dropped by helicopter at the top, or in some cases fallen off. Peridon (talk) 23:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * At the moment, it wouldn't change my opinion whoever wrote it. Peridon (talk) 23:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't say the blogs were published by you. Blogs are blogs. Not reliable evidence of notability. Peridon (talk) 23:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree about blogs being unreliable sources. If you consider something like CollegeHumor.com a blog, then I must be out of luck. And yes Greg Patillo is a beatboxing flute player. Search it on youtube (or wikipedia). He's very well-known and I've actually met him at one of his shows. I wasn't trying the "he's got one, so I can have one too" defense- I was simply making a point that you say my content is not notable and temporary, but is in the same category as a Zack Kim or Greg Patillo, who seem to be worthy enough. I am new to posting on Wikipedia and I now understand how seriously it is taken, and I respect your opinions and policies, though they make me feel very disappointed. But I am pretty confident that you (Wikipedia) will have to reconsider my article in the future (assuming that you go ahead and delete this original article). But once again, I stand by the sources. Though some may be considered blogs, there are credible sources in their too. Isn't it appropriate that a One Man Band would also write his own Wikipedia article? That was supposed to be humorous. Oh well, I guess (if you delete this) I'll have to just be patient like a 19-year old waiting to get into bars. It's always gotta be a long struggle to be worth it. Best wishes. MattyGtheMusician (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: no widespread independent 3rd party sources WP:MUSICBIO. JamesBurns (talk) 08:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for failing the notability guidelines. No sources can be found to establish notability.  Also note the clear COI who !voted twice in this AfD. Themfromspace (talk) 10:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * If you don't count CollegeHumor as a "widespread 3rd party source" that proves notablity, then there's something wrong with Wikipedia. Perhaps none of you have heard of the web site, but it is well-known and HAS A TELEVISION SHOW ON MTV in America. That is just one of my sources that you say are not good enough. But that alone should be enough. I can personally email you the letter that CollegeHumor sent me the first time they NATIONALLY syndicated my video in June 2007. (69.119.213.166 (talk) 09:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)) — 69.119.213.166 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * 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.