Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Mazzotta

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The result was Speedy Keep as nomination was withdrawn and WP:SNOW applies. (non-admin closure) XOR'easter (talk) 17:32, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Mazzotta

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not notable. This is WP:BLP and still no sources have been cited to support the claim. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 04:36, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 04:36, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 04:36, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep a simple google search indicates this is a well known contemporary artist and reveals more than enough sources to make a page. For instance this feature piece [1], I have added a few sources to the article. Changed to speedy keep based on discovered sources now in article. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 06:07, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep, a very strange nomination. The 2019 Guggenheim Fellowship should already have been enough of a clue that the subject is notable. In addition several other significant awards, and plenty of news coverage, as noted by Horse Eye Jack above. More than enough to pass WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Nsk92 (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:18, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:19, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep Guggenheim fellow. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 13:32, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Sources were already present, albeit as external links, in the version that was nominated for deletion. Definitely not suitable for deletion for failing the sourcing requirements of WP:BLP, (in which case WP:BLPPROD would have been an option). Vexations (talk) 13:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’m withdrawing nomination here. It seems the sb is notable and I misunderstood it with another when I searched on Google. Also, no link as citation lead me further to assume it. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 17:11, 24 August 2019 (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.