Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Mangels
though weak) - he has lots of published books, including a few non-fiction, he is a renowned features producer (on numerous high-profile DVD collections) and at the forefront of comic-book and animation commentary (on a similar number of high-profile DVD collections). This review http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2008/11/22/check_out_the_real_ghostbusters_the_comp of Time-Life's ''The Real Ghostbusters: The Complete Collection'' sort of sums it up, "Time Life has engaged the services of Special Features producers Andy Mangels and Reed Kaplan. Mangels is a best-selling novelist, author of Animation on DVD: The Ultimate Guide, and the producer whom TVShowsonDVD.com called "legendary."". If someone has that many books published, how can they not be notable? I think that, putting ones personal tastes aside, someone this renowned and published in the comic-book field is certainy notable enough. Unfortunately many of the refs are from internet magazine sites, so are being viewed as non-reliable, I cannot believe that we would that obtuse as a community. Many of those websites that he is featured in, quoted on, or even interviewed on, are surely giving a general air of notability - just because they are not the NYT or similar does not mean that they are not reliable. Here I think a  may be in order, there is not really a notability established in each individual field, but for someone who falls slightly short of notability under each of the creative aspects of "Writer" + "Producer" + "Commentator" = notable
— User:Chaosdruid, 18:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:IAR (Wikipedia:Ignore all rules)