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. While rationales varied, the strongest arguments seemed to surround WP:CREATIVE point 3. j⚛e decker^talk 16:10, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cathryn Mataga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable video game programmer. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 17:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Weak Delete Keep - Regrettably. I have found undeniable existence of this person but no significant coverage; one of her only mentions in a reliable source is a mere mention in a Gamasutra article. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 17:38, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Changed to Weak Delete since some sources were found but it's still rather flimsy. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Changed to Keep since I believe the current referencing demonstrates appropriately that the subject meets WP:CREATIVE. Good rescue, guys! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:05, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Likewise cannot find any coverage. Sam Walton (talk) 20:20, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sticking with delete despite the sources added. There is no significant coverage of the subject, sources are largely passing mentions or primarily about other topics. Sam Walton (talk) 12:42, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as no evidence of notability. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 20:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep if more sources can be found, otherwise please move to Draft:Cathryn Mataga so we can work on it per Wikipedia:Drafts#Incubation. BOZ (talk) 21:00, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How would drafting help it if there are no sources? Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 21:14, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would give us time to find more. And there are not no sources (as is clear from a cursory glance at the references section), there just haven't been many yet. BOZ (talk) 01:45, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to reiterate my Keep response, so that it doesn't seem like I have no rationale; at first I worried that no more sources would be found within a week. But, seeing how much we have developed from this point, I feel that we now have enough WP:RSes meet the WP:GNG at minimum, and actually a bit better than that. The "biography" section has more than quadrupled in size and now has seven separate citations whereas before it had none. BOZ (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Neverwinter Nights (MMORPG) or delete. I don't have a problem with moving this article to draft space, but like TT says, it's probably not going to accomplish much. Although she seems a bit obscure, she was apparently instrumental in the creation of the original NWN, which does make her a possible search term. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Sources can be found for William Mataga. I have added one from a 1985 print magazine, which is a fairly extensive interview with Mataga and a couple other people. I will add more details from it in the next couple days. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 04:43, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep One source links to William Mataga, is that the same person? [1] Anyway, their work is mentioned throughout a magazine article, I finding an archive online and adding that to the references [2], and mention of this person elsewhere show they are a notable coder, getting mentioned in interviews for their roles in various things that led to notable works being created. Dream Focus 05:32, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Both the mention in GDM and at Halcyon Days are coincidental and certainly not significant coverage that helps establishing notability. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about 2, but they certainly meet number 3 of WP:CREATIVE. Those articles mention people in charge of those games giving them credit for having a significant role in co-creating these significant or well-known works, which do get coverage in multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. Dream Focus 16:58, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Compute! Gazette source is pretty significant coverage as well. Multiple quotes from Mataga discussing video game design. Here's a link to the magazine. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 17:20, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Compute! Gazette says William Mataga, not Cathryn Mataga. I agree, they pass the GNG also with this coverage, if it was the same person. I just checked the previous version of the article, where it clarifies things by saying the person did undergo a sex change operation and change their name. "Mataga has worked on Neverwinter Nights. She was born William Mataga and at some point underwent sex reassignment surgery." Can we find a reference for that to put in the article? Dream Focus 20:37, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dream Focus:: I found and added a source saying they're the same person. So sources for either can contribute to notability. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 21:58, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, and thanks for all your diligence and hard work! BOZ (talk) 11:12, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fleeting mentions in reliable sources referring to the subject, does not qualify as significant coverage to be quoted a few times. WP:GNG is not met; career is otherwise unremarkable. wirenote (talk) 17:56, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Agreed with the above. The majority of the sources, regardless of how reliable they are, are such fleeting mentions of the individual that they most certainly do not come close to being signifigant coverage. There is really nothing left that fulfills the requirements of meeting notability. 99.151.24.53 (talk) 01:50, 19 May 2014 (UTC)— 99.151.24.53 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Keep per WP:CREATIVE. A person in the creative profession doesn't need in-depth sources about themselves (though it would be nice, it tends to be a high bar and is arbitrary) - rather, they need in-depth sources about the works they created - that is what makes them notable, their works. That is why Book Authors, for example, are notable when they have book reviews. The same here, this individual is notable for the attention paid to their works, games, of which they are a co-creator. -- GreenC 17:00, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • a book is written by one person and a review of the book helps establish the notability of the person that created that work. a video game is the work of hundreds and sometimes thousands of individuals and so a review of the work does not automatically make every one of them notable. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:39, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you're talking about modern big budget AAA games, that's true to some extent. But Mataga singlehandedly wrote quite of few of those games, and was the lead programmer on others. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 13:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Most of the sources you want to find are not going to be online and you'll only find passing references since the key work outside Neverwinter Nights (which was a huge credit and should meet the bar alone) is the Interactive Fiction work which is only going to be found in some period works that are stashed about. Though I think the Dragon's Lair work is also pretty fair - some projects less important and less impactful than others, but WP:NRVE. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:30, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another source, which is mirrored in a lot of my texts for this "Better than Zork" engine which was key for Synapse and the Mindwheel release is credited and based upon Mataga's work.Link. Many of the games produced and credited to Mataga are extremely obscure now, but Mindwheel and Neverwinter Nights are two credits alone which meet notability because they are entirely different projects with big impact - and it was for Robert Pinsky's work - the United States official poet from 1997 to 2000. Mataga's work allowed Pinsky's work to be functional and the work made a big impact in 1985 in the IF world. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:43, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Seems sufficiently notable and well sourced. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 17:51, 21 May 2014 (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.