Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charly Berger

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. Stifle (talk) 11:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charly Berger

[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)

Uncited since 2007. Film actor who appears to have only played minor roles, most not even with named characters. asilvering (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, and Germany. asilvering (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after 15 years if no one has found any reliable sources it is clearly time to delete. IMDb is not reliable, and we need to stop treating it as such, especially by having articles with it as the only source.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep More than enough mentions in GBooks to show he exists. Would probably find better sources in German of course. Oaktree b (talk) 23:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That he existed is not in dispute. That he passes WP:GNG is. Can you point to any mentions that might approach WP:SIGCOV? -- asilvering (talk) 04:52, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I have not crosschecked in detail but a list of ~100 films which looks similar to this one is supported by Filmportal.de [1] which I believe to be reliable. "Film actor who appears to have only played minor roles, most not even with named characters" is, I think, misleading when applied to silent films from this era (starting 1913); he was credited in lists containing only a handful of actors, which in current terms would equate to major roles; minor appearances simply weren't credited. The external links provide reliable basic sources including Deutsche National Bibliothek. Also hundreds of hits in Google Books; I leafed through the first 7 pages of hits and nearly all seem relevant. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relevant for what, though? The DNB link is just this [2] - a link to a list of films (the filmportal one). I have paged through the Google Books results, and found only passing mentions - can you point to specific ones you believe contribute to a WP:GNG pass? -- asilvering (talk) 04:49, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relevant to contradicting "Uncited since 2007. Film actor who appears to have only played minor roles, most not even with named characters." Espresso Addict (talk) 04:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In what way? The article is still uncited since 2007, and the google books hits do not appear to disagree with "minor roles, most not even with named characters". Are we somehow looking at two different sets of google results? Can you give any links to WP:SIGCOV? -- asilvering (talk) 05:24, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The concept of "minor roles, most not even with named characters" is a misfit due to the context of the time when those films where made. While it is true that imdb will go to great length to publish who "man at bustop #354" was, this was certainly not true of the publications of the time. Google books shows that he was listed in films closer to the time. Anyway all a moot point as he qualifies for WP:ANYBIO being listed in a national biographcal work (not just in Marlene Dietrich's autobiography) which makes him notable. The point being we do not decide who is notable, but reflect the published view which is why we defer to national biographical works. The details of the article can certainly benefit from attention but there is enaugh that spilled onto the interweb that the content of the article can be verified. For the rest someone has to look at dusty old books from the library. Agathoclea (talk) 10:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What national biographical work? Can you provide a link or bibliographic information? I'm happy to add some info to this article but I don't see this reference anywhere. Do you mean this, linked from the authority control template [3]? This is not a national biographical dictionary. This is a database search tool. The only biographical dictionary it links him to is Filmportal, which is not a national biographical dictionary. -- asilvering (talk) 20:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He's not in a national biography. I get absolutely nothing in my library search for secondary critisim. In ProQuest, I only get four hits for historic newspapers, all four of which are false positives not about this Charly Berger at all: [4][5][6][7]. In Google Books, including German books, I just see his name in various lists of cast members, I can't find one place where he even gets a full sentence. (The sentences I find are not about him.) These cast lists allow some information about him to be verified, but they are certainly not SIGCOV for GNG. I am not convinced by the argument that these roles meet the standards for WP:ENT but I think that SNG is the only possible way he could be kept. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 19:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Without any evidence of these roles being significant or any substantive sources, I see no basis for notability. Even with so many appearances, which of these were major films, rather than those quickly churned out in that era? Reywas92^Talk 00:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 08:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even the German language wiki has about as many references as this one does. Delete, can be re-created when better sources are found. Oaktree b (talk) 18:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b You might want to strike your earlier vote, since you appear to have changed your mind? -- asilvering (talk) 19:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have corrected my vote/stricken the first choice. Oaktree b (talk) 22:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there's a lot of input here from established editors, but without sourcing I don't see how it can be kept. @Agathoclea: what is this national biographical work? Like the others i"m having trouble finding anything. However @Espresso Addict: (already here, not a canvas issue as a clear heads up to closer) had a conversation recently about my sometimes broken google so I want to be sure my !vote is fair. Star Mississippi 02:32, 18 May 2022 (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.