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 delete. !votes from SPAs discounted. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hector Kim

[edit]
Hector Kim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

challenged speedy--perhaps it does make some claim to notability , but the references seem very dubious to establish that. DGG ( talk ) 16:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Using Google translate, I see no mention for Hector in either of those two Korean articles. I do see mentions of Saramnet, but this is not an article on Saramnet, and these mentions would not even qualify Saramnet as notable (in each case, it is merely a single item in a list of things that exist; no separate attention is paid to sarament.) As for the Who's Who, it shows sign of being a Who's Who scam -- WorldCat finds zero copies in libraries, which is not a sign of a reliable reference work. In some cases, these deals will put in a first listing for free, as bait for selling books, "lifetime memberships", plaques, etc., but in any case this is not a noted reference work and does not serve to prove notability. IMDB is both user-editable and not a source of claim of notability, as presence requires merely a credit rather than notability. --Nat Gertler (talk) 21:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is about Mr. Kim and his accomplishments. And, the issue here is notability if you have not noticed. The links to the newspaper articles were added as a means to verify his accomplishments as the CEO of SaramNet were indeed significant and noted in a published manner. As to your haste assumption on the credibility of the Who's Who listing, which by the way is not even in the article any more as noted above, my search attempt returns ten results in the United States, which then makes "The National Registry of Who's Who" a very reliable reference work accordingly to your logic. Your claim only suggests that either you did not want it to be found or your search skills are largely limited. Your response shows a sign of anxiety. Additionally, IMDB listing is a representative source of notability for professionals in the movie industries around the world. Try adding yourself as the director of Titanic. Let me know if it is "user-editable" as you falsely claim. In any case, I see no valid claim anywhere in your response. Please do not add to this conversation unless you are genuinely interested in making a contribution. WangGun (talk) 02:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I realize you are new to Wikipedia, and may not be familiar with its policies. I'm going to recommend that you review the Wikipedia policy on notability. For example, you will find there that establishing it requires "that sources address the subject directly in detail". Those Korean-language articles do not address the subject, Hector Kim, directly at all. No, being in ten libraries does not make something a very reliable reference source, it makes it quite scarce, compared to a real reference book. As for the use of IMDb to ascribe notability, that is specifically barred in some of the notability guidelines ("Trivial coverage, such as newspaper listings of screening times and venues, "capsule reviews," plot summaries without critical commentary, or listings in comprehensive film guides such as "Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide," "Time Out Film Guide," or the Internet Movie Database.") and falls outside the general guidelines for what denotes notability. And if you're unaware of where IMDb gets their data from, you may want to review how you too can add information to IMDb. --Nat Gertler (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment i just wanted to apologize to WanGun, i realize you have taken some offense to people suggesting mr.kim is not notable and recommending your article for deletion. contributions by new users are very much appreciated, we are not trying to discourage you from becoming a wikipedian. please don't take peoples objective analysis of your articles notablity as a personal slight, wikipedia just has very strict rules defining what is and is not acceptable for inclusing in the encyclopedia, particularly regarding biographies of living persons. ultimately though, everyones constructive contributions to the wikipedia project are fully appreciated, even slightly misguided contributions. WookieInHeat (talk) 13:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that he "made films" is dubiously supported; the IMDb listing is simply for an "H. Kim", and even that only has one film editing credit, for an erotic film noted mainly as a step in the decline of a former child star. There is also a TV editing credit, but following through to the show's IMDb listing, it lists H. Kim as working on "unknown episodes". --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2010 (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