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.
See
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warren Chaney for the complexities of this walled garden. This biography was written by the same sock puppets, with all the same problems as the Chaney article (and the others). I had gone through the article to remove the poor sources and try to see what was underneath and found insufficient evidence of notability, which when considering all of the other issues associated with these articles (again, see
the Chaney AfD), led me to PROD it. It wasn't deleted after 7 days, and on the 8th was deprodded by an IP requesting discussion based on a role in Kotch. To be clear, unlike some of the other articles there is evidence Winters exists and that she has been in some films -- there are a few brief mentions on e.g. rogerebert.com, but not enough to pass
WP:GNG. It seems worth emphasizing that a symptom of all of these articles is that they rely on big claims and tons of credits that exist almost exclusively in primary and user-generated sources. — Rhododendritestalk \\
15:39, 20 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep as she was Walter Matthau's co-star in a film that received several Academy Award noms. I was predisposed to let the Prod complete because of all the other problematic pages in the Chaneyverse, but I just looked at Kotch on YouTube and there sits Deborah Winters in the first scene. She is notable. As long as the article is kept trim and devoid of problematic cites, we're good here.
Stevie is the man!Talk •
Work16:51, 20 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep she was also in Winds of War (and not a small part either). Now, we ought to scrutinize the hell out of this article and keep it on our watch lists, but I think she is probably notable. (I'm actually doing my annual WOW watch trough right now.....)
Dbrodbeck (
talk)
22:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Comment - Fair enough. It looks like there's a case for
WP:NACTOR and perhaps the issues are not as pervasive as they are with Chaney such that in this case it doesn't merit
WP:TNT (especially considering it's pretty stripped down now). I'll just go ahead and withdraw this one. — Rhododendritestalk \\
23:33, 20 December 2015 (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.