Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Ryder

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. Davewild (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Ryder[edit]

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

No evidence of notability. No independent sources at all. (PROD was contested by IP with no edits except to this article.) JamesBWatson (talk) 12:36, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:42, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malissam: Appears that he is a public figure with a radio show in NYC. Perhaps previous jobs should be removed but he is still a public figure as supported by his reference link at the bottom of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malissam (talk • contribs) 18:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC) — Malissam (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure exactly what you have in mind when you say "a public figure", but the question is whether he satisfies either or both of the general notability guideline and the guideline on notability of people. If you haven't already done so I suggest looking at those guidelines. Can you find evidence of satisfying them? I have looked, an have not managed to do so. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed the general notability guideline and the guideline on notability of people and do not see any issues with this article. Would suggest checking links provided in references section of article. Also added additional information and reference link about Theater Thursday columns written by subject. atlradioguy (talk) 16:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC) — atlradioguy (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete. The references indicated do confirm that the subject works at a radio station, and that they wrote a column. But where are the reliable sources that actually talk about the subject? such coverage is one of the core requirements of our notability policies, particularly WP:BLP. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:50, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DO NOT DELETE.::*The links provided link to the subject's bio on the website with information on him. They provide sufficient proof that he is a public figure and should have this page. If you feel this is too much of a biography or "resume" why don't you make the changes you see necessary and close this debate? #aggravating. atlradioguy (talk) 16:50, 17 October 2011 (UTC) — atlradioguy (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Unfortunately you do not seem to have fully taken on board what has been said above. Nobody has suggested that the article should be deleted because it "is too much of a biography or resume". The reason is a lack of evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines, links to which are given above. If you can find evidence of satisfying one or both of those guidelines then the matter can be reconsidered. Also, you use the same expression "public figure" that was used above by Malissam (who, like you, has edited only the article and this page) but, as I said to Malissam, you have not made it clear what you mean by that. If you simply mean that he is a person whose has appeared on a radio station and in that sense has appeared in public, then that is not sufficient to establish notability according to Wikipedia's criteria. If you mean something else, more relevant to the notability criteria, then perhaps you can explain what you do mean, and if possible indicate where there are reliable sources to show such relevance. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:57, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as subject is not apparently the focus of coverage in reliable third-party sources, the minimum threshold for verifiability and notability for biographies in this encyclopedia. Welcome, atlradioguy, and please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Notability (people) is you have any questions. I see that your four edits to date are to the Matt Ryder article and to this discussion and I know that Wikipedia's "notability" policies can be sometimes unclear to new editors. - Dravecky (talk) 20:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Subject is an apparently-failed DJ who has moved on to radio sales. Nothing wrong with that, but does not mean subject warrants an encyclopedia entry. References in article are not substantial, secondary WP:RS sources as to subject's notability. Web search did not find any, either. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 03:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails the GNG since there is only trivial coverage. --Odie5533 (talk) 07:50, 21 October 2011 (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.