Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew C. Martino

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew C. Martino

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

This person is a nonentity. Unheard of. Does not run a charity. Is not an entrepreneur. (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schoola (talk • contribs) 22:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is a piece of self-promotion by someone with dubious business practices and no real public profile - the situation is explained in depth (with a summary) here and thus this page should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshubble (talk • contribs) 17:06, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:BIO 80.229.154.54 (talk) 01:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Properly formatting and transcluding AFD. – Train2104 (t • c) 21:12, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Zimbabwe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:51, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 16:36, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not enough to establish any sort of notability. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 22:42, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I checked all of the refs, they don't support notability, indeed they look more like fake news. Szzuk (talk) 19:07, 29 November 2017 (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.