Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hoff Productions

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. Daniel (talk) 04:14, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hoff Productions

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

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

Promotional article created by a COI editor, and largely edited by a team of single purpose accounts. No indication of notability after a BEFORE search - all I could find were primary sources that were not independent, social media, and PR. Does not meet NCOMPANY nor GNG criteria for inclusion. Bringing it here for the community to provide feedback. Netherzone (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Many, many hits in GBooks, indicating a minimum level of familiarity with the company. Oaktree b (talk) 02:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oaktree b, All I am finding are simple name-checks, two word mentions of "Hoff Productions" but nothing substantial ABOUT the company that would fulfill in-depth WP:SIGCOV. If you are finding in-depth coverage, could you link it here or add to the article? If sigcov can be found, I can withdraw the nom, but all I'm mainly finding are things like IMdB and other user-submitted content, simple mentions, streaming services and the like. Thank you for your feedback. Netherzone (talk) 02:36, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:GNG. The majority of the article is a list of productions, none of which are notable in any way. Philosophy2 (talk) 07:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this article has 3 "citation needed" tags and 15 "better source needed" tags, which is unusually much for an article of this length. Philosophy2 (talk) 07:31, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this list. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 01:48, 16 December 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.