Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tera Williams

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 delete. Daniel Bryant 08:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tera Williams

Tera Williams (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Notability in question. Appears to be a reporter of only local importance. ghits NMChico24 00:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete Fails the notability criteria for biographies. NeoFreak 01:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, fails WP:BIO by leaps and bounds. I can think of very, very few local TV news anchors who'd clear WP:BIO, and local TV beat reporters don't come remotely close.  RGTraynor  03:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Tentative Keep, the Burlington Industries implosion story marginally satisfies WP:BIO, although more noteworthy works would make a more solid case. Perhaps the original author of this article can add some? There are lots of Wikipedia articles involving local news reporters whose notability could be questioned. At least this is in a major market, Chicago. If we delete this one, where do we stop? Truthanado 04:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: When there are no local reporter articles that don't come close to satisfying WP:BIO, is my guess. Whether the Burlington Industries implosion is a notable story is one issue -- buildings get imploded all the time -- whether that makes one of (no doubt many) reporters who had on-air time commenting on it is quite another entirely. Only 36 Google hits for "Tera Williams" + "Fox" [1], almost all of which are blogs, her TV station's website and her own website. There may be some spam issues involved; almost the sole Wikipedia activity of the article's creator is putting up articles on various local reporters of Fox-affiliated stations.  RGTraynor  04:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Thanks for the additional information that I wasn't aware of. I change my opinion to Delete. Truthanado 11:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Covering a notable a story does not make one notable, unless it involves getting some sort of major "scoop" that other reporters on that same story don't get. And if that happenes, there'll be secondary sources which make mention of it that could be cited to establish that notability. Mwelch 06:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, While some local reporters, print and electronic, may satisfy the demands of WP:BIO this one does not. JBEvans 10:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete- for failing to meet WP:BIO. Retiono Virginian 16:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and other similar articles. Johnbod 19:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I created the article. I didn't intentionally create it as spam, I created it because I work at WGHP-TV and am familiar with some of the talent who have also worked there. Tera has since moved on to FOX Chicago. While she was at our station she was one of the better-known personalities on the air. She is also very popular in the Chicago TV market. My station and WFLD-TV are both owned by News Corp, which in turn, owns FOX News. It is likely that Tera will go on to work for FOX in New York, much like Erik Liljegren. As for the picture, I thought since it was a publicity still released by the station it qualified under fair use. If I'm wrong, feel free to delete it. Jwr0721 00:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Also, I would like to add - I think Tera qualifies under the Entertainer section of WP:BIO. Jwr0721 00:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Great! Which elements do you believe she fulfills, and (as is required per WP:ATT) what reliable, independent sources do you have for such an assertion? This certainly violates WP:COI now, where "you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when (1) editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with; (2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors ..."  RGTraynor  06:05, 12 April 2007 (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.