Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Dulcie

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Keep arguments around an SNG pass are less compelling when the evidence is they fail GNG and this is a BLP.

Spartaz Humbug! 22:46, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Greg Dulcie

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Greg Dulcie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Exclusively-voice actors don't get much publicity as a rule. Dulcie is not the exception, so

WP:GNG is not satisfied. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:27, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete when the first reference in an article is literally a link to the subject's resume it is not looking good for notability, and things do not really improve from there.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:55, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Please don't list real people at the "list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions". --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:06, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep while I don't deny that this is a poor article, I believe this person might meet
    Kohji Takao in Neon Genesis Evangelion, Toshizo Hijikata in Golden Kamuy, and Doppo Orochi in Baki the Grappler. Link20XX (talk) 19:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep Passes the subject specific guideline for voice actors, as Link20xx has stated. Dream Focus 14:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Basically no sources to establish notability. Esw01407 (talk) 15:05, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure the "no sources" part is correct. The roles above do establish notability under the SNG, and if you want sources for those, I have some (secondary sources even) [1] [2] [3] [4]. Link20XX (talk) 23:38, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think we need to stop applying actor criteria #1 to voice actors directly. Either that or we need to come up with a better more restricted understanding of "significant" in roles. There was a time when voice actors in some productions were not even credited. If people are not credited assuming they get notability from the role makes no sense. The rule was written on the assumption that the nature of the performance makes the person doing the performance in a significant way recognized for doing so. This happens in live action, it happens much less so in voice acting. Even less so when the voice acting is not connected with the original production but a new language production of the work.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:03, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reviews of anime usually review the voices of the characters. These aren't simply dubs like in olden times, they actually put far more work into selection voice actors these days since if it doesn't sound right, if the emotions aren't there in the voices, then people won't watch it. https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/people.php?id=53345 list all the roles of the person, with bold for the main characters. Dream Focus 14:22, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Anime Dub VAs are already significantly under-covered by secondary sources due to a combination of reasons I can only speculate on - but that already disadvantages them significantly over their animation/non-dub peers, and ofc - live action actors. This is a bad article which needs attention, amidst a sea of bad articles which need attention. I know for me, I've kept articles I've wrote to near-indisputably lead/main roles (when qualifying them for NACTOR, before writing them at all) - so I self-enforce a stricter interpretation already - but opening up that discussion would both be complicated, and as mentioned above, writing quality articles about them as things currently are, is difficult enough. As Dream Focus points out, times change - anime (and their dub VAs) have only grown more popular, but most importantly: have gained more significance for their work. Canadianerk (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ANIME/BIO talk page. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
AngusWOOF someone suggested that NACTOR point #1 should not apply to voice actors anymore, I replied. I don't have any confidence in starting one myself. If you want to have it, I'd be willing to participate- otherwise, I've got other articles which need my attention. Canadianerk (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion at
WP:ANIME/BIO talk page for those interested. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:55, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply to BriefEdits - I speak from experience that it can take hours of work to get one VA article the sources it needs in filmography - and there's so many of them, just within this subcategory of biography articles, that need attention. I don't want to get into habit of jumping into AfDs, and playing wack-a-mole cleanup - but for this one, it shouldn't take too long so I'll give it a shot. Hope it helps - please check back on the article sometime tomorrow (UTC) and let me know if the improvements help. Canadianerk (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Canadianerk, I wouldn't spend the hours confirming credits in cast lists when the subject's general notability is in question. You need to find newspaper sources that discuss the subject in significant coverage. A passing mention, even a one-line review of the subject's portrayal will not help the case. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 06:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
AngusWOOF I appreciate an attempt to save time for other editors, but I've already finished my "basic" (how I define it in my own mind, I s'pose) sourcing update to the article. I also acknowledge the attempt to provide your reasoning as to why I shouldn't bother, however, I'll be clear: Your interpretation of policy in this area is one I disagree with in part, and as you might recall - one I challenged multiple times in the second Marissa Lenti AfD. From what I recall, one I didn't get much of an explanation for in response - I was a *very* new editor, so it might not've communicated as clearly as I intended... Regardless, I've seen the original Lenti AfD, I agree with the decision then but not a portion of the reasoning. I know your general position in this area and that you've held them for years, and likely agree this is leaning towards delete on lack of notable roles (I haven't analyzed each role in terms of notability - and don't plan to - so I'm not voting) - I'm not here to debate your opinion, I'm here because the main concern of Oppose votes at time of the above comment, was the quality/sourcing of these roles. My goal here wasn't to just jump in and save the article solo, but enable fellow editors to debate its merits on the basis of NACTOR without being hindered by the lack of reliable sourcing. I don't intend to repeat this kind of time drain in the future regardless of the outcome, and focus on my plans to improve the filmography of dozens of EN VA articles this year. All the best, and enjoy your Monday- Canadianerk (talk) 07:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TOOSOON, then I would recommend draftify. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:23, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
WP:GNG AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:54, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm aware - the only reviews I found were on ANN: one line for Tokyo Ghoul re, one line for golden kamuy and 3 sentences for MHA: Heroes Rising.
They're not what you're looking for, but I didn't personally find any others, on and off ANN. Canadianerk (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete hardly any significant roles. Smoker is only recurring for one of the story arcs. Takao in Evangelion is a minor crew character only in the film series. Golden Kamuy he is just lost among the numerous characters. Baki seems to be a main ensemble role, about the only one. No anime conventions that feature him as a major guest of honor. No newspaper articles featuring him. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 06:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • While I admit that I haven't seen One Piece or Evangelion, I was operating under the assumption that any character with a redirect was probably significant in their own right. That being said, I have seen Golden Kamuy, where I would hardly say he is "lost among the characters". While he is listed first in the third subheader of the character list, that is because the series generally revolves around three groups of characters. The character in question is the largest character in one of these three groups, and if the list was divided based on protagonist/antagonist lists, he would be one of the top 3 antagonists. Anyway, it also appears they were cast a role in Akebi's Sailor Uniform, which is listed third on ANN. Admittedly though I haven't seen that series though so I can't speak to its importance. Link20XX (talk) 16:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this is mostly sourced to primary sources. Wikipedia is
    WP:NOTDATABASE and we need independent sources to write an article, and not just compile data into tables. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:49, 2 February 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Greg_Dulcie&oldid=1178969942"