Deletion of Ellen Kennedy

Comment: Although it isn't overwhelming, her work as a whole is sufficient to meet  #1. If these translations were fan-made then maybe it would be reasonable to expect more coverage as an indication of notability, but here the voice actors are hired by the distribution companies in order to deliver their product to the concerned region, in the same manner that the original actors were hired (and for the same reason). Also, in the case of cartoons, while it is true that most of the "performance" is due to the work of the animators, the voices cannot be simply taken as separate from the character, nor can the cultural effect of those voices on the audience (for better or worse) be ignored. It is true that third party coverage is deficient, but I don't expect any less from the mainstream media. That is not to say that voice acting doesn't get any coverage at all, because it is certainly a notable profession, nor that mainstream media is ''entirely'' whimsical, but only to say that the media does tend to focus on subjects that satisfy their (and their readers') immediate needs, so coverage cannot be the one and only measure for inclusion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACTOR)

Comment: criteria #1 of  is "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.", and her roles in English dubs of anime definitely qualify. English dubs of Dragon Ball Z, Hamtaro, and Escaflowne have all seen wide release on broadcast or cable TV in the US and Canada (not merely direct-to-video release).  specifically mentions voice acting, so I'm not sure why a lack of live performances would be relevant
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACTOR)

Comment: there appears to be little indication that voice-only roles, either in animation, dubbing into a foreign language (or both) are accorded any particular 'significance' or recognition by the video/television/movie industries. This is perhaps due to the lack of any strong recognisability accruing to the roles. Regardless, it is the animator (or original visual actor) that is perceived as the 'star', not the voice-actors. Wikipedia would appear to have two choices in such circumstances -- it can either allow  to guide its interpretation of  and consider that significant roles are those that generally garner significant coverage -- which has the advantage of generally resulting in articles on purportedly-biographical topics that have a reasonable level of ''biographical'' coverage. Alternately, it can impose its own ''subjective, expansive and independent'' interpretation of significant role -- resulting in a large number of articles that are little more than lists of roles cobbled together from  sources. Given that the latter would appear to be an invitation do violate , I believe it is  to go with the former
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NACTOR||WP:PRIMARY||WP:NOR||WP:COMMONSENSE)