Deletion of Peter Hudecki (2nd nomination)

Comment: Hudecki is '''mentioned''', but not '''written about''' in the books listed by MQS.  Unsurprisingly, the article has zero references.  Merits at most half a single sentence in the ''Little Rosie'' article, and wouldn't merit mention in any of the other articles in which he's credited as the rest of the article is essentially a resume of positions that don't meet , such as "storyboard artist." Perhaps the strongest evidence for deletion is the following  from the article: ''Most notable was lip sync and facial animation for the Bud Light commercial Smooth Monkey during the 2004 Super Bowl. It was in the top 10 of the Super Bowl advertising poll.'' If that's as notable as his work gets, that's not notable enough. Separately, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mascania strongly smacks of autobiography, though that's not a reason for deletion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ENT||WP:PUFF)

Comment: Simply non-notable. I really dislike the way GNG has been over-used lately to try to shoehorn in non-notable people just because some writer, somewhere, once decided to write something about the person. That's just  once removed
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: Meets  and  as a producer, director, and animator with a career spanning 3 decades. Pity that he shares the name with an sports figure, but OUR Hudecki is written of in a few http://books.google.com/books?um=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22Peter%20Hudecki%22&sa=N&tab=np books, and his career can be be sourced to  meet . And no,  does not also require meeting ... if it did, there would be no reason for  to even exist
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:BIO||WP:ENT||WP:GNG)

Comment: Verifiability concerns are serious, but we dont delete articles for presently being unverified, but for being unverifiable. The difference between the two may just be work, e.g. finding this http://mad.durhamcollege.ca/EN/main/programs/animation/faculty/peter_hudecki.php.  Same story with notability, the material question is if a person with this profile would likely pass.  The answer is yes, also per the discussion at the first AfD. I'm concerned about the nomination.  It's surprising and disquieting if an editor (the nom) with 90,000 edits under his belt, presents such a distorted wiew of the  and the speciality  guidelines.  The original nom also cited a violation of  which is also misleading, if not grossly misleading, as the article contains no ''harmful'' info, if anything, the concerns could be vanity. These guidelines produce much cover for poor deletion rationales
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:N||WP:BLP)