Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bria Roberts


 * 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. Nothing indicates that either GNG or NACTOR has been met here. Courcelles (talk) 15:18, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Bria Roberts

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Advertorially toned WP:BLP of an actress, with no strong claim of notability per WP:NACTOR and no valid reliable sourcing. The notability claims here involve appearances on reality and pseudoreality shows, such as playing a plaintiff on a judge show and appearing in a 1000 Ways to Die scene (a show in which non-speaking extras act out the scene while the only voice the viewer hears is that of the show's narrator), and the referencing here is entirely to primary and unreliable sources, such as IMDb, a Facebook post, a video clip on the website of the network that airs one of the shows she was in, a "weird news" blurb on the Huffington Post and a database of film posters. As always, a person does not get a free pass over NACTOR just because she's acted -- she gets over NACTOR when her acting has been the subject of reliable source coverage in media, but none has been shown here. Bearcat (talk) 18:05, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete-Fails WP:NACTOR.  FITINDIA   18:38, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.   FITINDIA   18:41, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.   FITINDIA   18:41, 24 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete does not meet notability guidelines for actresses.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:55, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Hi, the original comment contains some incorrect information. Roberts was not an extra on 1000 Ways to Die, she was the lead actress who spoke many lines.  She was also nominated for an award by Disney and Lucas Film last year.  And I watched her NBC interview last year. She has broken 3 Guinness World Records as a contortionist, all of which aired on TV.  She isn't just an actress but also contortionist and has been on lots of shows.  Her role on America's Court was not reality or pseudoreality.  America's Court is categorized as a drama.  She played a mom with kids and her name was Maria.  She was acting, not being herself.  For more sources, she's on the Today Show website and some other places. User:Floppy292
 * — Floppy292 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * There are no "lead actresses" on 1000 Ways to Die; it's an anthology show where each episode consists of three or four discrete "sketches" cast with one-off actors, and appearing on it does not count as a "major" role for the purposes of WP:NACTOR's "major role" criterion. America's Court with Judge Ross is a pseudoreality judge show on which actors play the litigants in a small claims court case, not a "drama", and appearing on it does not constitute a "major" role either. And there is no claim of notability that anyone can make that ever entitles them to an automatic inclusion freebie on Wikipedia just because they exist — a person must be the subject of enough reliable source coverage in media for an article on here to become earned, so to get this kept you would have to show much better evidence of media coverage about her than is present anywhere in this article right now. Bearcat (talk) 17:39, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi again, I still think she meets the criteria. There are "lead actors" and "lead actresses" in 1000 Ways To Die.  The definition of a lead actor is someone with the largest part in a piece of work, even in Wikipedia's definition.  I think her televised Guinness World Records also make her eligible as an "entertainer."  They've been broadcasted worldwide.  She is subject of coverage in media.  I found some links of her in media.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju4BXxLww7o       http://imagecollect.com/picture/bria-roberts-eva-longoria-eva-longoria-parker-photo-4813133/power-players-celebrity-cruise   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe0lxSRHES0   http://fast.celebrityphoto.com/celebrity_photos_search/262737?search=Photo%20by http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/03/bria-roberts-contortionist-skips-leg-behind-head_n_4193363.html  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe0lxSRHES0

Floppy292 Floppy292 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:09, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
 * In a television series, a lead actor is a person who has a regular role as a main character across multiple episodes, not just one. Also, YouTube videos, blog entries and photographs in photo repositories do not assist in demonstrating notability under WP:GNG — a source has to represent written content about her in reliable sources, such as real newspapers and real magazines and books. The fact that somebody took video of her performing and posted that to YouTube does not represent reliable sourcing, because anybody can post video to YouTube of anything. Bearcat (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, I didn't say she was a lead actor of the "television series". She was the lead actor of the episode titled "Stench of Death."  Wikipedia's definition of lead actor states that it can be a film, play, or piece. "The word lead may also refer to the largest role in the piece and leading actor may refer..." She was the lead of the piece.  Wikipedia also says it can include people who have recognizable awards in their specialties. Bria has that.  And there are sources with written content about her.  Yahoo TV News, The Huffington Post, AOL News, and an Australian printed magazine in public circulation.  I posted the Huffington link already.  Here is the Yahoo TV News link.

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/jump-rope-record-attempt-goes-poorly-except-it-totally-doesnt-on-today-203740017.html   Floppy292 21:00, 31 July 2017 (PST)
 * Quibbling over whether the dictionary definition of "lead actor" covers off the main actors in one 10-minute dramatic reenactment sketch on one episode of a pseudoreality show that has no regular cast doesn't change how Wikipedia's notability criteria work — for starters, our notability criteria for actors do not contain the phrase "lead actor" at all. We do not extend an automatic inclusion freebie to every actor who's ever acted just because they have had roles that can be verified by an IMDb page. What we require is substantive coverage about her acting in reliable sources, such as actual critical reviews of her performances and/or substantial articles about her in the entertainment sections of real newspapers.
 * But that's not what you're showing: the Yahoo link is a blurb, not a substantive piece; Huffington Post is a source that can be used for supplementary sourcing of stray facts after notability has already been covered off by stronger sources, but cannot confer notability by itself if if's the best you can do for sourcing; and "an Australian printed magazine" can't assist notability until you provide a lot more detail about it than you did: it's not enough to just say a magazine article exists, but rather you have to provide the exact name of the magazine and the exact title of the article and the exact issue date in which it was printed. Anybody could claim that sourcing exists for anything — we have to be able to verify that the claimed sourcing actually does exist, which we can't do without its exact and full publication details.
 * And, for that matter, we don't extend an automatic presumption of notability to every person who can be claimed to hold a world record, either — such people still have to be the subject of better coverage than this before they get an article, especially when their record is for some manufactured distinction that they created for themselves by being the only person in the world ever to even try such a meaningless thing, such as "Most Skips With Leg Behind Head in 60 Seconds". Bearcat (talk) 15:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: To discuss the newly mentioned Yahoo News source. Also, please remember that NACTOR might not be the only applicable guideline (cf. WP:BASIC or WP:GNG)
 * Delete: fails the provisions in WP:NACTOR.   Dr Strauss   talk   08:44, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  13:50, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Bearcat, she isn't the "only person in the world to try such a meaningless thing," as you worded it. The original record was held by a different person, as explained in the episode of Guinness World Records Unleashed that she was on.  She had to break someone else's record.  So again, you're providing incorrect negative information. It is correct that she later broke her own record (In the link provided) but her original record on TruTV was breaking someone else's record.

Whether or not you think she meets all the criteria for an actor, she meets the criteria to be included according to other Wikipedia guidelines that SoWhy gave because of the awards in her specialty and media and source coverage. She has also met criteria for making a unique contribution to entertainment. Floppy292 01:05, 3 August 2017 (PST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Floppy292 (talk • contribs)
 * It's already been explained above why the sources you're showing don't cut it. Awards only confer notability insofar as the media cover the presentation of that award as news (e.g. Oscars yes, Local Businesswoman of the Year no) — but you're not showing the kind of media coverage that it takes, but mere blurbs and unreliable sources and vague intimations of other coverage you're refusing to name. And you are not making any strong demonstration that she's made a notably "unique" contribution to entertainment, either — every person who exists in the entertainment industry could always claim that their contributions were "unique", by simple virtue of the fact that their contributions were theirs and not somebody else's. What that criterion refers to is unique contributions like being widely recognized as the originator of an entire notable musical genre or an important stylistic innovation within an existing one, not every single thing that could possibly be described as "unique" even though there was nothing important about it, because everybody who exists in any industry could always describe their work as "unique" in some way. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * the "media" has covered the presentation of the award. and there are hundreds, yes, hundreds, of people in Wikipedia who's only notable award is a Guinness World Record.  A girl who broke the record for longest hair, a guy who broke the record throwing a playing card the farthest, and other things of the sort.  they weren't on NBC, yet they're included and considered "unique." Not because they called themselves unique, but Guinness World Records did.  They and their awards are respected.  Bria Roberts clearly holds a Guinness World Record and was clearly on television and in news for it.  The sources showing this are more "reliable" and notable than the sources for the other Guinness World Record holders in Wikipedia.  NBC is one of the world's biggest networks and if their own website isn't considered "reliable," then what is?  These are all "reliable sources"...NBC News, Yahoo News, Guinness World Records, Today.com  She is also on Ellen's verified page.

http://www.nbcnews.com/video/can-woman-set-guinness-record-for-jumping-rope-with-a-leg-behind-her-head-760405571555 http://www.today.com/video/can-woman-set-guinness-record-for-jumping-rope-with-a-leg-behind-her-head-760405571555 http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/most-skips-with-one-leg-behind-the-head-in-one-minute https://www.yahoo.com/tv/jump-rope-record-attempt-goes-poorly-except-it-totally-doesnt-on-today-203740017.html http://www.spike.com/video-clips/9ni4z6/1000-ways-to-die- http://entertainment-newsss.blogspot.com/2013/11/bria-roberts-contortionist-attempts.html Floppy292 5:13, 6 August 2017
 * Blogspot and Yahoo News are not reliable sources; Spike's and Guinness's own self-published websites are not independent sources; and the problem with the NBC/Today links is that they're not substantive coverage about her accomplishing a trivial feat, but simply video clips of her accomplishing a trivial feat. They do not represent substantive coverage about her for the purposes of clearing WP:GNG, because they don't verify anything about her biography. You're simply not providing, and appear not to even understand, what kind of sources are actually needed to get a person into Wikipedia — none of the links you've provided so far represent the type of sources we require. Bearcat (talk) 17:03, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.