Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew McKagan

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 keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:17, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew McKagan

[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)

There are some articles about the awards and nominations, but none of them would lead to notability. The cited sources are WP:ROUTINE, and all the content covered in the news reports seems to be provided by McKagan or other involved parties, thus making it not intellectually independent. Churnalism does not make notability. (t · c) buidhe 01:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Music. (t · c) buidhe 01:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I evaluate these as the three best sources: [1][2][3]. I agree with the nominator that these sources fail WP:ROUTINE and are probably not intellectually independent. While being a middle school teacher is a noble profession, it is not very notable by Wikipedia standards. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:19, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I should also add that McKagan could have taken his music education skills to any level he wanted: high school, college, or beyond. That is the opinion of many in the music education industry, which spans K-12 and college. The main reason he chose the middle school level is that what was open when he came onto the market scene, shortly after the Northridge quake (he was attending Northridge College at the time) - he could teach at any skill level. It can be an almost a greater skill to be able to form the concept of music in a young mind, than an older, more experienced mind. He also has led professional groups, which I did not include, due to lack of citations. Additionally, he had significant professional hornist performance experience that I did not detail for the same reason. Thank you again for your consideration. Sincerely, Scott McClelland Philo1208 (talk) 22:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:03, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep -- LA Times is a top-tier newspaper that covered the BRAVO award win with an article, so that's one significant coverage point. Each of the other two awards had more than ten winners/nominees, so they're not enough on their own though the KCLU coverage of the grammy is significant and with the LA Times the article may be. I disagree with @Novem Linguae about the articles probably not being "intellectually independent" -- the Bravo award was 1999 and the Grammy nomination in 2022; that doesn't seem like a single press release becoming multiple article type of material. I definitely don't want to set a precedent that every good middle school band director is notable, but if there are five in Wikipedia he should probably be one of them. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 02:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Secondary-school music teachers are far from automatically notable, but they can still be notable through WP:GNG. I think there's enough in-depth coverage, in enough different secondary sources, for enough different events, to qualify. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:25, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your interest in the Matt McKagan article. I am the person who wrote the article.

I have known about McKagan since we attended school together, then diverging at college. I was personally impacted by McKagan's musical leadership, and realized he was special (I can supply my own pedigree if needed). His reputation in the industry quickly grew. I watched with great interest as McKagan turned a neglected music program into a national force to the point where boosters built a $5M performance/recording hall for him, while he created professional music performers and music educators by the dozen. He truly personifies the Mr. Holland Opus award he attained. This music educator is a rare talent.

I may have mischaracterized the article with incorrect tags. Please correct me where needed. I am still learning about them. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Sincerely, Scott McClelland Philo1208 (talk) 22:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I identified the same WP:THREE sources as Novem Linguae but come to a different conclusion. This subject passes WP:GNG. This is significant, not routine coverage and there is no basis for the claim that the sources are not intellectually independent. ~Kvng (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you mean by "no basis for the claim that the sources are not intellectually independent". Let's take a look at #2 for instance.[4] About half the article is quotes and the rest of it is basic information that likely came from a press release (eg "The ultimate recipient of the award will be recognized during GRAMMY Week 2023 and will receive a $10,000 honorarium and matching grant for their school's music program."). There's nothing in the article that wouldn't belong in PR material. (t · c) buidhe 14:25, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Buidhe Thank you for clarifying what you meant by and presenting evidence for intellectual independence. I would look at this more closely but I don't think I need to bother now that other sources have been found. ~Kvng (talk) 11:43, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to confirm User:Philo1208, do you have a conflict of interest regarding the subject? Please see WP:COI. - Indefensible (talk) 08:02, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Indefensible, there may be some COI in that I knew McKagan from Jr high through high school. During college, we diverged and lost contact. McKagan went into music education in CA and I went into IT in Seattle. However, I followed McKagan's career path with interest from afar as his successes in the music education industry began to mount up.

When I read McKagan was nominated for Music Educator of the Year Grammy award, I believed I knew enough about McKagan to document his music education career. Philo1208 (talk) 00:16, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, I removed the Personal section, leaving just facts pertaining to his music education awards. Philo1208 (talk) 00:21, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there seems to be enough to support inclusion, but I recommend Philo1208 abstain from substantial edits to Matthew McKagan's article per the COI policy. You can discuss requested changes on the article's talk page. - Indefensible (talk) 03:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. LA times article is reliable/significant, and a single quote is not too much to maintain independence. Here's a Seattle Times source with some coverage [5]. We can also consider WP:BIO which says If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability, and combine the Seattle times coverage with [6], [7]. —siro χ o 08:42, 28 June 2023 (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.