Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roberta Weiss

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 11:30, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Roberta Weiss[edit]

Roberta Weiss (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced BLP. Does not meet any notability guidelines. » Shadowowl | talk 16:55, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:14, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The notability test for an actress is not the having of roles, but the depth and breadth and volume of reliable source coverage that can or cannot be shown to get her past WP:GNG for the having of roles. And any article (including outright hoaxes) could simply claim that it "could be possible" to find better sources — so to get the "keep and flag for reference improvement" treatment, it needs to be shown that better sources do exist, not just theorized that maybe they might anything's possible who knows. And brother bear's Google search results are not showing any evidence of reliable source coverage of this Roberta Weiss — the hits are mainly the self-published primary sources of a real estate agent, not reliable source coverage about an actress. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The significant role in Santa Barbara (161 episodes) is easily verified, and as well as a smallish role in The Dead Zone, she had a lead role in How to Make Love to a Negro Without Getting Tired ([1], [2]), as well as significant roles in Mangeuses d'Hommes, High Stakes, and Abducted. Easily satisifes WP:NACTOR. --Michig (talk) 07:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Red Phoenix talk 03:27, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Looking at paywalled newspaper databases, there's some coverage from the late 80s and early 90s. For example, Toronto Star article from 1987, covering a party: "Among the munchers were American Cousin John Wildman and the gorgeous actress on his arm, Roberta Weiss, star of the summer release High Stakes." Or a Toronto Star article from 1995 on the then-new series Family Passions: "Soap veteran Gordon Thomson (Dynasty, Santa Barbara), plays Mathias Haller, while fellow Canadians Andrew Jackson (All My Children) plays Jan Futing and Roberta Weiss (Santa Barbara) plays Dolores." There's also a 300+ word story from 1994 in the New Orleans Times-Picayune all about her that also confirms the Santa Barbara and Family Passions appearance: "Whether Weiss-Bizeau was doing what she wanted, she still was doing exceedingly well. In a "Santa Barbara" stint that lasted less than a year, she was key to the city, playing with fire the incendiary con artist Flame Beaufort" and "Recently, Weiss-Bizeau appeared as a diner proprietress on "Family Passions," a syndicated serial unique in that it was taped in Canada and bankrolled by Germany." There's more. It's minor coverage, and it's in newspaper archives, but it exists. Bakazaka (talk) 06:28, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The article is completely unsourced, so it clearly violates WP:BLP. The lack of substantive coverage of this actress means she is not notable enough to warrant an article. Random mentions dredged up from old archives about also being in a project or on the arm of some man are not notable or unique in any way. Newshunter12 (talk) 05:50, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the archived sources such as a 300 word story directly about her enable a bare pass of WP:GNG, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:07, 1 September 2018 (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.