Deletion of Mike Pollock

Comment: but just looking at the article he looks notable enough to me (so --> keep). Note that if this guy was playing cricket, see , he would have romped it in for N, which allows inclusion for one major appearance even if that appearance was a complete failure
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCRICKET)

Comment: to Doctor_Eggman#Voice_actor_portrayal. Users canvassed https://twitter.com/itsamike/status/747965717035753472 via this tweet. All sorts of classic Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid above. The article has been Wikipedia:Bombardment|refbombed but it's easy to tell that most of the sources are either primary or unreliable (BtVA, Soundcloud, Sonic Blog, Crystal Acids). A person is not independently notable for their own Wikipedia page just because they are "known" for something. Ostensibly that being known for something leads to actual |significant coverage in multiple |reliable, |independent sources. (|?) such that there would be enough secondary source content to, you know, actually write an article. Right now I'm seeing passing mentions in Animenewsnetwork sources and the rest is junk. The "delete" is since there is no information worth merging, and the redirect is because his name is prominently mentioned in the character article, so as to be a useful redirect. But not enough for an article and a shame on the canvassing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS||WP:IS||WP:42)