Deletion of Michael Hartman

Comment: Sorry, I'll be more specific. I didn't mean ghits as a criterion for deletion, rather as a suggestion that there can't be any assumed notability as there appears to be no "published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject". Taking the time to look at the results for http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Michael+Hartman%22+frogdice+-wikipedia&start=50&sa=N 23 ghits for ''"Michael Hartman" Frogdice -wikipedia'', for example, there are no items that meet . The |original research here is especially evident in the last two paragraphs of the current article, speaking of the subject's influences and his notoriety in online gaming circles. These are completely unattributed and unattributable. And as to the award, I'd like to remark that they're of indeterminate notability; in the Threshold (online game) article, the "award" from TopMudSites.com appears to only be its ranking based on total users, while the awards from The Mud Journal evidently ''cannot'' be verified as their site has long disappeared and is not in The Internet Archive; failing . As to the ''Computer Games Magazine'' mention, there's no reference to back it up, so we can't even establish the significance of the mention for either the game or for this subject. I'm not asserting he needs meet every criterion, rather that he ''fails'' every one. &mdash
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NOR||WP:V)