Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Theatre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Theatre. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Theatre|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Theatre. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

Theatre

[edit]
Daniel Sachs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Refs are passing mentions, profiles, about us pages and other misc/non-specific coverage. Fails WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 11:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is WP:SICOV? Ruccc (talk) 12:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ruccc, Scoop creep mean WP:SIGCOV. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood! Ruccc (talk) 14:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PimComedy Fashion Show (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

References are event listings and non-rs entries. Fails WP:SIGCOV. A before virtually nothing. scope_creepTalk 12:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Renz Nathaniel Cruz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unclear if there's enough here for WP:CREATIVE/GNG. Most of the sources have him name-checked as a member of the musical ensemble, but I'm not seeing any in-depth coverage. KH-1 (talk) 03:18, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as he clearly isn't notable. Tavantius (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Collapse spate of brand new editors seemingly canvassed to this discussion. Daniel (talk) 09:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reconsider deletion. An article from The Varsitarian provides significant coverage of Cruz's role in forming OperaJuan, an emerging youth opera and musical theater group, demonstrating leadership in his field. Cruz is quoted discussing the group's mission, showing he's considered an authority figure. The coverage provides substantive, independent information that establishes Cruz's notability in the field of Philippine music. I have expanded the article with this information. Ixo490 (talk) 03:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's the publication of his alma mater. There's one sentence for background and two quotes. It's not really enough.-KH-1 (talk)
Comment. Notability has nothing to do with being an "active performer". You have to do be unusual to be notable, not WP:MILL. You need to stand out so that the media gives you WP:SIGCOV. For example, winning a Tony Award. Also, plenty of Philippine performers get a lot of WP:SIGCOV. See, for example, Lea Salonga or Morissette Amon. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can retain the article. Google recognizes the legitimacy of the artist. Ixo490 (talk) 06:15, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I believe there are compelling reasons to keep the article. As an emerging artist in the Philippine music and theater scene, his role in forming OperaJuan demonstrates leadership and initiative, highlighting his contributions to the local arts community. While he may not have extensive coverage yet, Wikipedia should be open to documenting rising talents, especially those making innovative strides in their fields. The presence of the artist's tracks on major streaming platforms and evidence of active performances suggest a legitimate, ongoing career in the arts, providing a solid foundation for the article that can be expanded as the artist's career progresses. Furthermore, as a young artist working in opera and musical theater in the Philippines, the artist may represent an important voice in the country's evolving performing arts scene, making it valuable to document his work for those researching contemporary Philippine culture and music. Retaining the article allows for future growth; it's not uncommon for articles on emerging artists to start small and develop over time. Additionally, including articles on up-and-coming artists from various countries enriches Wikipedia's content diversity, offering a more comprehensive view of global arts and culture. Given these points, I suggest keeping the article with appropriate sourcing and a neutral tone while monitoring for additional notable achievements or coverage that can further establish the artist's relevance. Editlife1tr (talk) 06:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Collapse spate of brand new editors seemingly canvassed to this discussion. Daniel (talk) 09:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Editors are super obsessed with deleting articles of actual living professionals. Get a life. Keep the article. Loewemathers (talk) 06:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Googled the person and he is in fact a singer from the Philippines. Everything seems true and correct. I don't see any false or misleading information nor form of self-promotion. TOOLINK (talk) 06:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I wonder how the people recommending deletion can verify the notability of any theater or opera artist from the Philippines when none of them are from the country. Not to mention, there's no existing database on Philippine theater and opera artists. This is a good contribution to the category. Thompson.walkins (talk) 06:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Second this. These people are bored to death. This could help expand the list of local artists from Philippines. I don't see enough information on them. Ixo490 (talk) 06:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Opera is a niche area of performing arts. Looks like their country doesn't have reliable information regarding this field. However, this online database of classical musicians recognizes him. TOOLINK (talk) 07:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Struck duplicate !vote from Thompson.walkins. DMacks (talk) 14:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Make Wikipedia great again! Please stop deleting valuable, truthful information. Go and look for other pages to delete. There's real vandalism and then there are people hellbent on eliminating legitimate entries. TOOLINK (talk) 06:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Striking duplicate vote. You can only cast one bolded "vote". Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • To all of the new editors to Wikipedia, first "Welcome!" Secondly, Wikipedia determines whether or not an article should be Kept or Deleted not based on a vote count but based on whether or not notability can be established by reliable, independent secondary sources. They can't be "passing mentions" but provide SIGCOV (significant coverage). So, your pleas to save this article or accusations against other editors or Wikipedia won't have much impact but if you could find additional sources from mainstream new sources (not blogs or social media) could help establish notability and influence whether or not this article is Kept or not. Wikipedia is governed not by editors' opinions but by policies and guidelines and this is how we determine what articles should be Kept and which ones should be Deleted. Liz Read! Talk! 07:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Collapse spate of brand new editors seemingly canvassed to this discussion. Daniel (talk) 09:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Even A.I. recognizes the person. Hate to admit it, but I trust Artificial Intelligence more than these notorious editors. Loewemathers (talk) 07:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is that supposed to mean? Geschichte (talk) 08:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Struck duplicate !vote from Loewemathers. DMacks (talk) 14:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Helen Donaldson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2018. Not clear that the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 15:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Theatre, and Australia. WCQuidditch 19:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Only the first Google news hit seems decent, but otherwise seems coverage mainly for namesakes. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Satisfies WP:NACTOR with her stage roles [1], specifically: 1. touring with The Pirates of Penzance as Mabel [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] (multiple reviews at each of these stops). A recording of one of the shows was also released [7], the soundtrack of it won a 1995 ARIA Award. 2. touring with The Mikado as Yum Yum [8] [9]. 3. touring with H.M.S. Pinafore as Josephine [10] (not just the highlighted section) [11] [12] (recording also released). 4. touring with A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum as Philia [13] [14] "Forum Is Light Musical Theatre At Its Very Best", The Canberra Times, 2 April 1999 - Vincent, Jeremy (4 January 1999), "Revival revels in farce, not class", The Australian. She is the prime focus of articles Brown, Phil (23 July 2008), "Back to the start", Brisbane News and Kelly, Patricia (26 June 2004), "Family puts a song in Helen's well-travelled heart", Courier Mail. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you please cite the sources (and add the missing noteworthy facts) in the article itself? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 20:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Verkine Karakashian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoyfulTentmaker That is not a valid policy based keep vote. WP:SIGCOV requires multiple sources with independent significant coverage, which we generally interpret at AFD is a minimum of three sources. One book source, no matter how in-depth does not meet our notability guidelines.4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I kindly disagree, a single book may indicate existence of more sources. Even without references, deletion nominators are expected to do a good faith WP:BEFORE: to check Google, Google Books, Google Scholar, and Wikipedia Library if possible. AfD is not a place to urge people to fix unreferenced articles. Nomination must come only after there are good indicators that the subject is not notable, regardless of the state of the article; as stated in WP:NEXIST. Sorry for repeating these in multiple nominations of yours, but there are not enough people watching these nominations about niche topics like this one, and I honestly believe it will be a loss for the encyclopedia if these are prematurely deleted. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 21:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CeeGee I think you created the article, pinging just in case you were not notified. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We need other sources, suggesting that they exist isn't helpful Oaktree b (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheJoyfulTentmaker You seem to be misinterpreting policy language. WP:SIGCOV requires multiple sources as a non-negotiable criteria for all wikipedia articles. It's a must and its policy. Period. WP:NEXIST requires people voting to keep articles to produce multiple sources at the time of making a keep argument at an AFD. Asserting there are sources through guesswork is not following NEXIST; nor is arguing for keep based on a book you personally have not seen. Providing sources with url links or the names, publication dates, and pages of specific sources that you personally have looked at is following NEXIST. As for me, I looked at several standard opera reference works, including a Russian language music encyclopedia and found nothing on this person. My attempt at BEFORE may not be perfect but please WP:AGF. Best.4meter4 (talk) 00:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you re-read WP:SIGCOV because it doesn't say what you think it does. The immediate subsection doesn't mention the number of sources but a bit further it says "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Multiple sources are not a "must" and the requirement is not "policy" (our notability documents relate to guidance rather than policy). Thincat (talk) 10:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The sourcing is improved, now we have 6 references (one thanks to @Oaktree b's Armenian Wikipedia pointer), and hopefully notability concerns are now reduced. Also, I'm curious about the opinions @Basak and @Buidhe, who are experienced editors with contributions related to Ottoman Armenians on the English or the Turkish Wikipedia. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Covered by several additional Turkish sources [16][17] Additional Armenian sources [18][19] The main ref in the Armenian article is the Armenian Soviet Encyclopedia. Whether there were citations at the time of the nomination is irrelevant to AfD. Aintabli (talk) 03:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I see that new relevant sources were added since the beginning of this discussion, therefore to me it is clear that the article should be kept. Of course, it’s possible to add more sources and improve the article. For example here, it’is possible to learn what were the important roles she played in her years at Güllü Agop Company and in Benliyan Operet Company: Women in Ottoman theater life — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basak (talkcontribs) 06:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC) --Basak (talk) 06:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 21:02, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Torontow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR. Bit-part actor. scope_creepTalk 14:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find either anything in previews nor any mention of him in the play reviews. It a complete mystery to me how they can jump to a keep !vote almost immediately without presenting any evidence per WP:THREE. I did a search using reliable sources search which covers the major Canadian newspapers and not a thing came up, on him. There is reviews of the plays. You would think there would be some mention outwith passing mentions. scope_creepTalk 14:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I think he is 46, so he is well advanced in his career. Aszx5000 (talk) 15:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you have hit on a crucial point there. I need to remember that for the future. Almost middle-aged and no reviews. Good point. scope_creepTalk 15:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thewikizoomer: What sources exactly. You seem to flit from Afd to Afd without providing any evidence for you keep !votes. WP:THREE is considered best practice for proving the person is notable. Do you have any reference that prove this person is notable? scope_creepTalk 16:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: keep !votes would benefit from specifying which sources establish Notability here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 17:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This WP:SPA editor has made few edits to Wikipedia. scope_creepTalk 09:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 11:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]