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 keep. Withdrawn by nominator in response to significant page improvement efforts and demonstrated notability. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:43, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Guido Henkel

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Guido Henkel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lots of red flags for a WP:SELFPROMO article. Littered with puffed up accomplishments and suspiciously specific and unsourced biographic details---an editor named "Guidoman" pops in often to announce new developments in Mr. Henkel's life. In terms of sourcing, it's a mix of self-published/primary sources, secondary sources confirming the existence of products he's worked on with only minimal (if any) mentions of him, and unverifiable dead links. I do not think they amount to significant coverage. The relevant guideline is WP:CREATIVE. Out of the four possible criteria, he could only possibly qualify under #3, "played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work". He has a lot of credits over a long career, that's not in doubt, but I don't see any sources that establish him as a central figure in the creation of those works. Axem Titanium (talk) 10:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. WP:AUTHOR => "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews."
In the works list that Axem Titanium left I see eight notable games he worked on, at least three more are notable but don't have an article in en:WP yet (but in de:WP, with good sources), and with just one Google search I found sources for two of the games Axem Titanium deleted from the list.
What's this AfD about? Quality issues? That's the way to deal with quality issues? Weird. Kind regards, Grueslayer 11:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am not contesting that the subject is credited on notable games. I am asserting that his contributions do not constitute the "major role" that WP:CREATIVE requires. One can have a minor role in creating as many games as you like but so long as those roles are minor, they do not confer notability. To the extent that sources refer to him in the context of game development, it is not in his capacity as a creative. Obviously, this AFD is about deleting an article on (what I believe is) a non-notable subject, otherwise I would have used one of many alternatives to deletion. Your insinuation otherwise is frankly uncalled for. Axem Titanium (talk) 12:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I beg you pardon? That actually made me curious and I gave the games list a quick look (Mobygames only...) to see if he played a minor role somewhere. That is indeed the case, for Jagged Alliance he "only" did the music, and The Oath should be deleted from the list (only credited for the manual). But otherwise? Producer or designer. What could be more major? Kind regards, Grueslayer 12:22, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, one of many designers or programmers who worked on these games. Usually the director or lead designer is the one we label the "major role". Video game producer is not principally a creative role---it's more like a product manager who manages and allocates resources on a project. Axem Titanium (talk) 12:34, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I find it appalling that such obviously biased comments as "it is not in his capacity", "puffed up accomplishments", "suspiciously specific" and "pops in often to announce new developments in Mr. Henkel's life" were used in this supposedly-neutral discussion about the deletion of a Wikipedia article. I do not doubt that user Guidoman is the subject himself (causing a COI), but one should remain neutral and polite in discussing any person or article. Merely because one edits one's own Wikipedia article does not make the topic of an article less important. Putting someone down (in such a condescending manner as noted above) is not a way to intelligently and neutrally review an article. The article could certainly use a re-write and better sourcing, but I see no puffery anywhere. I simply see a lot of facts put into sentences. There is no flaunting or bragging of any irrational or embellished accomplishments (the word "puffery" is far too often used on Wikipedia to degrade a topic in review). I believe that if this article is to reviewed, it should be on the basis of lack of proper sourcing. There are better ways to deal with articles lacking proper sourcing than deleting them.
Things of Note:
  • There are 98 results matched for the exact term "Guido Henkel" on the Internet Archive's printed text archive (mostly video game magazines), spanning from 1988 to 2021. Upon quick glance, one article from Computer Gaming World precisely states "Guido Henkel, designer of the Realms of Arkania series", while another in Next Generation lists him as the director of Planescape: Torment (contradicting Axem Titanium's comment about "not being in his capacity" and not holding "principally creative roles"). These archival entries should all be reviewed and taken into consideration as proper sources before the article can be determined for deletion.
  • First of all, half the hits in this search are false positives to a 19th century Count "Guido Henkel von Donnersmarck", so those are obviously not relevant. Our Guido is a designer of Realms of Arkania, more accurately one of several programmers on various entries in the series. The Next Generation result is actually from an advertisement that parodies a movie poster. It's not actually reporting from the magazine. In fact, no one is credited as director for Planescape Torment and Guido is credited as one of two producers. Chris Avellone, as writer and lead designer, is widely considered by reliable sources to be the main creative force behind Planescape. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Henkel is mentioned several times over the years in articles of notable newspaper. It appears that he was interviewed (though not in length) or quoted a number of times with regards to his website DVDreviews.com between 1999 and 2002. Have a quick look on Newspapers.com.
  • I don't have a subscription to Newspapers.com so I can't actually see the results here. If you do, please share. Importantly, it would need to be significant coverage of DVDreviews.com itself that establishes notability of the website, not merely reprinting reviews from the website. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking up "Guido Henkel" (in quotes) in Google and Google News also reveals a large number of interviews and feature articles published on both notable and reliable online sources. I do not think that "non-notable" applies given these results.
  • There are also reliable sources that confirm that he was a guest speaker at major conventions like Game Developers Conference and Fangoria's Weekend of Horrors. It is not within the aim of these conferences to invite non-notable guest speakers, as their goal is to attract the largest possible audience. These simply need better sourcing.
--OrangeZestAir (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know where you got the impression that AFD is a place for neutrality. Editors obviously come here arguing for a position either for or against deletion. WP:NPOV is a policy that applies to article content, not discussions. COI editing does not automatically make the subject less important but it does mean that any claim to notability made in the offending text must be scrutinized to a greater degree than it otherwise would with the presumption that it has been puffed up. I responded to your bullet points above in-line. Also, buddy, did you log into the wrong account? Axem Titanium (talk) 21:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Keep. Artist is prolific at the very least in the video game industry since the 1980s. As pointed out above, the subject has been featured and interviewed in many reliable and notable sources. Here are my own findings. All signs point to a keep.

--Fallingintospring (talk) 00:38, 28 January 2022 (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.
More