Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel McDonald

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. Consensus is that the coverage offered is not sufficent to have this article. Courcelles 03:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joel McDonald

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

Unsourced BLP. Prod contested. No significant coverage found in reliable sources. Michig (talk) 16:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I was unable to find significant reliable source coverage. The only mentions I could find were passing references and the sources and not necessarily even considered reliable sources such as: [1] and [2]. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Quite a notable career. Passes WP:ENTERTAINER having played a significant role in notable works. And yes, the sections of Anime News Network controlled by paid editors is considered a reliable source. Good find. Dream Focus 03:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Just to clarify those two references I included above I do not consider significant coverage. They are just passing references. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:06, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Dream Focus 21:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unfortunately, none of the coverage comes even close to significant--just passing or limited mentions. As such, this does not pass the GNG. Yaksar (let's chat) 06:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: (i) little evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" & (ii) little evidence that participation in derivative works such as foreign-language redubs (which are generally not themselves independently notable) confers any notability, so would not appear to meet WP:ENTERTAINER. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 13:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ENTERTAINER includes voice actors. This person is a professional voice actor with a long and notable career. Its not just some random fool they hired to mindless read something without the proper emotion in it. Reviews of anime usually include comments on the voice actors, it a significant part of it. Dream Focus 16:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Dream Focus for that bald WP:ITSNOTABLE statement -- just the sort of detailed, well-substantiated argument I've come to know and respect from you. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 16:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC) [reply]

I found and added two external links to interviews he did. Those interviewing him believe he is a notable "ADR Director, voice actor, and adaptive screenwriter." Dream Focus 16:24, 4 August 2011 (UTC) My mistake. Should've looked more thoroughly at the site before mentioning that here. No need to be rude. Dream Focus 19:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Come on. No one, not even you, can honestly believe that an interview with the non-notable online podcast "That Anime Show" is a sign of GNG worthy notability.--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:59, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I removed the external links per WP:ELNO but they were quickly re-added. It is now being discussed on the talk page of the article: Talk:Joel McDonald. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:24, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am confused as to how involvement in a process as banally mechanical as "Automatic Dialog Recording" can be considered to be "notable" (especially lacking any reliable third-party sourcing). And no, interviews on a podcast usually don't meet WP:EL. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 18:32, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The links still offer information about the topic's subject. That has nothing to do with the AFD though, so lets please keep it on the talk page. Dream Focus 19:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The principle is simple -- if you don't want it responded to on the AfD, don't raise it on the AfD. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 03:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RS and WP:CRYSTAL. The only source cited in the article mentions the subject only very briefly, and with reference to a future event. Richwales (talk · contribs) 01:01, 6 August 2011 (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.