Jump to content

Talk:Louisa Moritz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nominated Article for Deletion

[edit]

Any thoughts and comments? This person is certainly not a celebrity or noteworthy person, not even in the field of law, which got deleted by someone else, I believe. Bambolinaz (talk) 03:51, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea that Louisa was involved in the legal field, but as an actress, she was actually fairly prolific in the late 70s/early 80s. I'm not such suggesting that she was a star or anything, but it's easy to confirm that she was in many movies and TV shows back in that era. She may be a minor celebrity, but I think she certainly passes the threshold for notability. 209.90.140.72 (talk) 01:56, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do know Wiki is the only source on the net that says she died at 82 when all others say she was 72. Just want to point that out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.120.254.61 (talk) 18:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged Filmography

[edit]

None of the articles for these movies and shows on Wikipedia mention this woman's name. Bambolinaz (talk) 04:01, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Almost ALL of these alleged roles are hearsay and not documented anywhere on Wikipedia articles for the film and TV shows. Being an "extra" on a few old shows does not make one notable or worth mentioning in an article. Bambolinaz (talk) 04:12, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not every single role has to have huge significance; if the actress is notable (and I'm not saying for sure that she is or isn't), then it's normal to have the entire filmography in the article. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 04:43, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any other other links to third party reliably sourced articles mentioning her film roles? She's not listed on Wikipedia or anywhere else as an official cast member to anything in her "filmography."

Prior to my input, there were edits added to this article filled with promotional fluff and emotional comments, like written by the actual subject or relative of the biography. Bambolinaz (talk) 11:56, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's much more likely that someone just copied the info from IMDb wholesale; like I say, it's pretty normal to have a complete filmography no matter how small the parts were. She is actually listed on the One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest page cast list. And Death Race 2000. And mentioned at Six Pack Annie. And Carquake. So saying She's not listed on Wikipedia... isn't really true now is it? Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 12:09, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Her being portrayed here like a celebrity or someone noteworthy enough to have a Wikipedia page (other than those few mentions you did possibly find) isn't really true now is it? It sounds like you are interrogating me and conversing with me in a tone as if I am not making good faith edits, which I am. If you see those sources that are listed with her name (which I have not) then add them. I am saying that I Googled her and have not found any reliable third party sources that confirm her alleged already minor parts in these films. None. But perhaps you can find them? And if you do, it seems as if they should be added to that particular film's Wikipedia article, not to an entire page about her, which in itself really has no "meat" or merit. Bambolinaz (talk) 14:03, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • And I'm saying that you're lying. While raw Google results may be dominated by tabloidery, the supposedly disputed credits are easily confirmed by reliable sources. Just googling her name in conjunction with the film title, or limiting the Google search results to Books, demonstrates the falseness of your comments. As does the very first raw Google search result, a newspaper article including a paragraph beginning "Actress Louisa Moritz, best known for her role in the Oscar-winning “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, which would be quite hard to overlook if you were looking in good faith. This account has been editing for barely 24 hours, but shows experience with WP policies and practices, and edits exclusively on a single subject, showing animosity toward the subject -- in short, a standard profile for a disruptive SPA sock that should be shown the door if the behavior continues. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 16:02, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Louisa Moritz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:22, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]