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 redirect to Diablo III. (non-admin closure) 4meter4 (talk) 14:00, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Martens (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I prodded this with "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. I". It was deprodded by User:Dream Focus with an edit summary "notable from accomplishments". I am sorry but what accomplishments? The subject seems to have a reasonably successful career but that's not the same as meeting NBIO. There are no awards, no in-depth coverage of his life or said accomplishments - only a few mentions in passing that he worked on this or another game, plus a few interviews that are generally not about him but about projects he worked/works on. The article hasn't improved at all in half a year since the PROD, and I doubt it can be improved anytime soon given the lack of better sources, at least that I can find. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:54, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:54, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The short article says he is one of the two designers of Diablo III, that a notable game that sold over 30 million copies. The subject specific guidelines for creative professions judges them playing a significant part in a notable creation. Dream Focus 16:43, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't have a stance yet, but that argument alone isn't enough - it violates WP:NOTINHERITED. There's got to be more to be a valid keep rationale. Sergecross73 msg me 18:20, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that NOTINHERITED applies. Most corporate game developers are pretty anonymous people that stay out of the news. They usually only have an article if they founded a studio or something like that. ApLundell (talk) 19:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Diablo III. Not independently notable. KidAd • SPEAK 20:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• https://www.cgmagonline.com/interviews/talking-orcs-and-humans-with-kevin-martens/ He's been interviewed and talked about for his work. Dream Focus 23:01, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Right, but it's about his work more so than about him, and Wikipedia:Interviews are below-average sources... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  That is a pointless essay. Interviews have always counted as reliable sources. They talk about him, his life, and his achievements in the game industry. All interviews talk about what the person does, what they are notable for. It clearly counts as significant coverage in a reliable source. Dream Focus 08:32, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  It is a very useful essay, as it reminds us that most interviews are just a step away from SPS, as they repeat words by the subject ad verbatim. While they come with some editorial oversight, it doesn't change the fact that what we have in such cases is the subject speaking about themselves; at best, the usual editorial oversight concerns which parts of the interview are published and which (if any) are not. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:58, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  We're discussing the interview as indicating notability, not using it as a source of information in the article. Reliable sources believe someone is notable enough to write about them and/or interview them, then that counts towards their notability. They are independent from the subject since they are not owned by them or the company they work for. The general notability guidelines have thus been met. Dream Focus 09:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Perhaps we have to agree to disagree as I don't believe this niche interview meets the requirement of being "Independent of the subject", since they are just quoting him verbatim. See also WP:QS _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:44, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  It is clearly defined at Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline as: "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent. Dream Focus 13:52, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Even all that aside, aren't we just talking about a single interview here? A single source is fundamentally not enough to satisfy the WP:GNG. Your argument has bigger issues here. Sergecross73 msg me 15:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Arguably, an interview is significantly "half"(?)-coproduced by the subject themselves... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  That article could be a perfectly useful source for an article about Diablo III. Nobody doubts that Kevin Martens is an expert about the development of Diablo III. That is not the same question as whether or not he has independent notability. ApLundell (talk) 15:08, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - WP:GNG not met, especially for a WP:BLP. There's minimal content anyways, the "article" isn't much more than someone converting a table of his development credits to the barest and most basic of sentences. Sergecross73 msg me 11:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - No real independent notability is demonstrated or asserted. It's not like much content would be lost. Besides his CV, the article's content is three sentences. Two describing his love of scifi and fantasy, and one saying that he had difficulty adapting to America. (from Canada.) ApLundell (talk) 15:08, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment While the GNG is not met, there is arguably - I will not say for certain - sufficient reliable sourcing to have WP:NCREATIVE #3 be met, however, my understanding on NCREATIVE has tended to be that this is when we are talking projects developed by an individual or very very small team (2, 3 or so people). While he being a co-lead and thus a key person on D3's development is an important and critical role, we know that he was only one of dozens (if not towards 100+) people involved in the game, diluting how well NCREATIVE applies here. But I am only pointing this out, since this goes to Dream Focus's point above, but may not be sufficient to keep. --Masem (t) 19:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You bring this argument fairly often, but the section that contains it begins as follows:

People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards.

(emphasis mine)

NCREATIVE should be used as an indication that a subject could be notable, as to determine whether additional research could be viable, not to actually establish notability. The ultimate determination should still go through GNG, which this subject apparently fails (based on the comments above). IceWelder [✉] 06:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine that's why he stopped short of an actual keep stance. Sergecross73 msg me 16:31, 21 October 2021 (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.