Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Monro Jnr

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 no consensus. WP:NPASR Stifle (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Monro Jnr[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced biography of a living person. Notability per WP:NMG questionable, to say the least. bender235 (talk) 13:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There is no doubt in my mind that this article was a COI situation, driven by a publicist. I had some dealings with it roughly a year ago & tracked the editor down off-wiki. It was not difficult. On the other hand, there were claims of some big following in the Philipines and I regret that I did not follow that through, after ascertaining that the sources provided were inappropriate. He may indeed be notable there - do we have a Philippines project? Is it worth posting anote there? - Sitush (talk) 02:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could always leave a note at Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines. They have robust discussions on their talkpage, so your note would likely reach some people.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:39, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines#Matt Monro Jr. - Sitush (talk) 10:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Way before my time, but a search in Google News Archives reveals a lot of secondary sources from the Philippines.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 13:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Enough GNews coverage to support a claim of notability. Cavarrone (talk) 19:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 09:38, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.