Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Tillitz


 * 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. Despite the valiant efforts of the authors, there is consensus here that the article does not display the level of independent coverage in reliable sources we demand for biographical subjects. Skomorokh  17:19, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Rob Tillitz

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

An incredibly promotional autobio on a non-notable author. The article claims that the subject is a fisherman/smuggler/writer/actor/innkeeper, but the links that would verify most of that appear to be broken, and nothing shows in google news. (Even if true, it's not clear to me that being a felon and an author makes one notable). There does appear to have been a book that was reviewed by a blogger. There's also un-substantiated claims that the book is in rewrites with a screenwriter who may or may not be notable, in which case I think WP:CRYSTAL applies. B figura (talk) 07:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable, even if statements on page were true. Appears to be a good candidate for a speedy. --BaronLarf 08:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete He does not meet the WP:Bio threshold. His books are self-published and have not received any notice. The citations to the Seattle Times are incomplete and don't link. Searching turned up "10-year sentence for man convicted of smuggling hashish into Washington" which is about Falco, but mentions Tillitz's flight to Mexico and 12 year sentence in passing. So he is a felon. No mention of him was found in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer or the Seattle Weekly. --Bejnar (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

 *DON'T DELETE-- The information I relate in my article is indeed true, though hard to verify least with my limited Wiki knowledge. Not to mention the crime was committed in 1992, and the conviction in '98. There were many articles in dozens of newspapers, including all the major Seattle papers, but their internet-accessable archives don't go back that far. Should have worked with the material in the sandbox longer. Did not realize the standards, and thought I could simply start the article and put it together over a period of time. Thus, on the one hand I agree with the critical comments generated so far as my article is a rough draft, on the other I'm not sure that discouraging new material, or material from an ex-felon and self-published writer, is the intent of Wikipedia. I thought Wiki was here to gather knowledge. If you Google my name, you will get a ton of hits. I am someone who has accomplished many things, and many say an inspiration. Michael Keoph, who wrote the book The Fisherman's Son, an author that for some years has held the title, at least on the West Coast, as the man who best depicts fishing, said about my book "Bootlegger's Cove" that it portrays a fisherman's struggle better than any other work, and he included "The Perfect Storm," which was not at all about the big wave, but about how tough commercial fishing is on families and of course the fishermen themselves.

I've sold about 600 copies of Bootlegger's Cove since I self published in April/2009. I think that's significant. The story, if you guys would let me tell it, is one that continues to effect many, and I think at least as notable as Jeffrey R. MacDonald, a man I did time with, and who killed his wife and children. Work with me please. I'm trying to put together an informative piece. Before June Morrall passed away earlier this month, she was enthralled with my story, and posted me many places in her three blog/sites. Her article here on Wiki asks for more links to her, more support for her, and I'm trying and being chastised.

Is this forum meant mainly for criticism, or are there helpful contributors out there. I feel like the new kid at school that is not particulary good-looking, not part of the in-crown, and is thus being picked on. Nevertheless, thank you guys for your criticism, as I am trying to figure out the Wike program, and you're comments add pieces. I have a lot to offer. Few know about what commercial salmon trolling was like, as it's been closed for many years. Prison depicted in a non oh-poor-me light (i.e., the benefits I received from doing time) you'll not find on Wiki, nor many other places either. Then there's Mexico as a fugitive. Robalone (talk) 22:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Rob Tillitz


 * Technically, this forum is to decide whether or not the article should be kept. That decision will be made on whether you would be considered a notable author as defined by this page. As a general rule, self-published authors aren't considered notable, and their articles are deleted. In general Wikipedia isn't a place to promote yourself, or raise awareness of your books. While we also like getting new information, because wikipedia works on the principle of verifiability, that information would need to based on reliable sources, not your personal experiences. -- B figura  (talk) 01:52, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The issue is never whether information is true, or not, as B figura  says above, it is about the verifiability of information from reliable sources, and whether the person meets the notability guidelines. --Bejnar (talk) 09:30, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

*DON'T DELETE-Italic text I have now verified all of my pertinent information. Had many bad links because I did not set them up right, and I also found a long and detailed story in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that I did not have before. There is a great story by Seth Rosenfeld in the 7/AUG/1994 SF Examiner Magazine, and I have a copy of it, but cannot find it online in order to link--Can I scan that and use that somehow? About self publishing, Writer's Digest sent me a link last summer to an article that proclaims as of last spring sales of self published books have surpassed conventionally published books. In this world of computers, everyone is an author, and publishing houses are inundated with manuscript submissions. It is impossible to get published conventionally today unless you've history. Does not matter if one is the greatest writer ever, your manuscript does not get read. Thus, I did what it took to get published, and that I sold 600 books on my own is significant. Maybe that is the meat of my story: The journey of self-publication, and winding up on the big screen. I've been, by the way, on the Eureka NPR station, and the Brookings, Oregon, TV station, and in a handful of coastal newspapers, all interviews about the book. Everyone is not only intrigued with the book, but the journey to get it published and the contract with Ryan McKinney for the screenplay that followed. It is not about selling books. Honestly, I really could care less if this article sells me a single copy. I am taking the time out of a busy schedule to do this because many people have insisted. Maybe it's not a significant story in your world, but it is in many others.

Just the same, the article grows as I'm able to learn the Wiki process, as well as marshall more verifiable facts. Thank you guys for taking the time to comment, though I argue with you, I'm learning from your observations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.238.175.170 (talk) 19:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Two self-published books that might take off, or at least get some mainstream reviews; and a script that might someday get made into a movie. If those things happen, the author could become notable. But Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and this author is not yet ready for an encyclopedia article. I wish him luck with his career and hope the article can be resubmitted later when he becomes more notable. --MelanieN (talk) 21:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)MelanieN
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - doesn't pass WP:BIO, due to a lack of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. If additional references exist, even offline ones, they should be provided; as it is, he doesn't seem sufficiently notable for inclusion. Robofish (talk) 01:40, 2 February 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.