Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Hoffer


 * 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. please note that, despite ending up on the short end of this debate, your comments and contributions are indeed welcome. Your argument that the subject's work will grow and a wiki article is inevitable in any case is what's known in wiki-jargon as the WP:TOOSOON argument. Should it eventually come to pass that there's additional coverage, a new article about the subject can always be written. The existing version could even be used as a starting point, by eventually making a request at WP:REFUND to have the old text restored and moved to draft space. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:58, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Kevin Hoffer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet criteria of WP:GNG or WP:NCREATIVE. The majority of the sources provided are not about him, rather they are about films, and he's only mentioned in the articles. I can't find significant discussion of him in reliable sources. ... disco spinster   talk  20:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ...  disco spinster   talk  20:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ...  disco spinster   talk  20:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete "Directing" an English dub of a movie is not the same thing as directing a movie. The obscure comic book that he co-authored isn't notable either. Sonstephen0 (talk) 22:04, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:31, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:31, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:31, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:31, 25 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. "English dub director" is nearly the definition of not notable. None of the sources say anything about Hoffer, except that he was, indeed the English dub director.  He does not come close to satisfying any of our sets of criteria for notability. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:17, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Okay hi! I'm not sure if I'm doing this right. In the spirit of 'don't be afraid to participate' I'll jump in here with more of my reasoning. ADR direction may be more like theatrical/performance direction than animated film direction, but it certainly falls under the purview of directing and what a director does, and the subject is being attributed with such, for significant animated film titles, by multiple sources. So these deletion votes read to me like a strange bias or misunderstanding. The subject is also attributed by multiple sources as being a director of theatre, with some reviews already included in the article of subject's directorial ability (not just cursory mentions of subject, as suggested by initial reviewer). Related to that I would say that reviewing a director's work is in and of itself discussion of a director. In any case there is a distinction between fame and notability, and I believe according to WP:GNG (there is significant coverage, reliable integrity, plenty of sources) and WP:NCREATIVE (I would argue subject is regarded as important as a creative professional, just in a smaller sphere) the subject meets the criteria to at least not be deleted --  the article can be improved upon with additional sourcing, admittedly, so I'd like to advocate for keeping the article with a note to improve verification of sources (or some equivalent). Far less supported wikis (including ref'd wikis like John Lavachielli) are currently live and accepted. I think we need to do better than saying 'they're not notable'  -- well, okay, but according to what criteria? Because I've done the work sourcing the existence and merit of the subject and just saying 'it isn't so' seems fallacious, and also prevents me as the creator from crafting better work for Wiki because it's a non-starter kind of comment. I strongly suspect the subject's work will grow and a wiki article is inevitable in any case, though that's neither here nor there. Thank you for your consideration! -- 3shoggoth (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 03:10, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per . This isn't about the significance of dub directors, but WP:SIGCOV. Daask (talk) 20:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)


 * 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.