Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Trobbiani

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. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 16:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Trobbiani[edit]

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

Does not neet biographical notability. No independent references in article, and no independent coverage found on Google search. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:56, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 19:59, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 19:59, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect into Hacknet#Development. Not notable in his own right, not inherited from the game. Not sufficient further NEXIST for more than a few lines of stub. If anything way TOOSOON. Possible valid search term so merge and redirect his name into the game article. Aoziwe (talk) 12:03, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ per nom. He isn't even mentioned in the article, so merging would be unnecessary._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 09:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Um, that was my point. He probably deserves one line in the Hacknet article ? Aoziwe (talk) 12:45, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:53, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable enough. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 02:59, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note there is a 2016 Rolling Stone article on his experience as a developer.

Can you provide a link to this? Whether this helps would be dependent on how in-depth it was, if it was focused around him or not, and whether or now, and how much, of the source was an interview. Just saying a source exists doesn't help a ton by itself. Sergecross73 msg me 19:00, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I had added it to his and the game article Patrick Stafford, Glixel, (3 June 2016), Solo Indie Game Development – Not for Faint of Heart, Rolling Stone

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please evaluate if the Rolling Stone profile is a sufficient demonstration of notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, A Train^talk 12:51, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I would like to change my vote to Keep. After looking in VG Custom Search I found two more sources. [1] [2] The Kotaku one especially is definitely significant coverage. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 00:13, 1 August 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.