Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Fergusson-Stewart

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. under G6 (non-admin closure) L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 15:13, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Fergusson-Stewart

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

promotional article for someone whose job is promotion. I tend to look at such articles quite skeptically. There is very little here that indicates any actual notability, and a great deal that indicates a self-indulgent bio, ("Fergusson-Stewart honeymooned on Islay and named his firstborn daughter Islay."--which happens to be where the Scotch he promotes is produced) known to be written by a declared paid editor, who is by training a PR professional .I think this is one more instance that paid editors, declared or undeclared, regardless of their good intentions,are generally not likely to write a NPOV article. The references are PR, and that;s all there is. DGG ( talk ) 17:58, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- a PR-driven page on a PR person, who is moreover 100% non notable. The award listed is extremely minor and also PR-driven. Basically, spam. I was very close to tagging it for SCD as A7 / G11. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the Huff Post article was by a contributor, not staff. I'm not seeing where this BLP passes even minimal GNG. ^{Atsme📞📧} 21:50, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a non-notable PR person.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:00, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTPROMO. Article is essentially a PR piece on a non-notable individual with no significant, independent coverage. Kb.au (talk) 13:37, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An unremarkable guy doing a worthy but unremarkable job. (He has a remarkable resemblance to Max Headroom, but that's OR, I see no source that mentions it.) Maproom (talk) 23:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Reads like a paid entry in somebody's big book of résumés. – Athaenara ✉ 23:15, 4 January 2018 (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.