Matthew Hiltzik

Matthew Hiltzik (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log • Stats)
(Find sources: "Matthew Hiltzik"news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

Subject does not appear to be notable according to WP:BIO but has merely received glancing mentions in several sources due to typical work as a publicist. —Eustress talk 04:22, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:15, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I believe that Matthew Hiltzik is more than just a publicist. I looked at the references, and this is someone who got a full page profile in the Washington Post. There was also a NY1 profile on him, and both of these are listed in the references. After reading the profile, it seems that he is more than a publicist. AEAA (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
  • It's unclear to me why this particular article is tagged for possible deletion. Subject meets the WP:BIO criteria for notability, with multiple published third party stories in major media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Please keep this page, as I do not see any sufficient reason to remove the page. This page follows structure and format, while referencing where needed. Matthew Hiltzik is also an executive producer, which is noted in the article. He has also worked on multiple award winning films. He does meet the criteria for notability as well. GD23 (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I've seen this guy's name associated with a number of national stories in the last 24 hours. i don't think this article is a good candidate for deletion. Legacy2012 (talk) 17:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC) Legacy2012 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Like what? Please provide concrete examples and explain which criteria of WP:BIO this individual meets? —Eustress talk 18:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment I hope none of the comments above can be attributed to sock puppets. I am trying to assume good faith, but for editors with little or no edit history to jump into an AfD discussion is highly suspect. —Eustress talk 18:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 00:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  • The Washington Post article is in depth enough to suggest notability, but a lot of it is name drops; unable to find any other in depth independent source to meet multiple. IMDb references and poorly formatted titles to try to influence search results are not encouraging. Dru of Id (talk) 01:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Week keep - I really hate to say it in light of the suspicious behavior above, but I think the fact that the guy is the focus of at least two nationally significant reliable sources (The Washington Post piece and the Variety article) that he may just squeak by the general notability guidelines. A lot of the other sources are crap/trivial and the article could use some major cleanup, but he does seem to legitimately have his hands in a lot of notable things in a notable way. DreamGuy (talk) 02:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Please see the NY1 One on One piece as well. That profile articulates the notability of the subject.(GD23 (talk) 18:00, 22 June 2012 (UTC))
This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Articles for deletion/Matthew Hiltzik, that was deleted or is being discussed for deletion, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Author(s): GD23 Search for "Articles for deletion/Matthew Hiltzik" on Google
View Wikipedia's deletion log of "Articles for deletion/Matthew Hiltzik"

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.