Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Red Orchid Theatre
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 keep. It'd have been nice if the article had been expanded, but it seems to be a notable theatre from the coverage. Fences&Windows 18:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A Red Orchid Theatre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
non notable theatre WuhWuzDat 07:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 342 google news hits, don't have time to examine them right now. Polarpanda (talk) 10:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- and something discussing the topic: [1] Polarpanda (talk) 12:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Google news hits include TOILING IN THE TRENCHES RED ORCHID THEATRE STRIVES TO BLOOM THROUGH ADVERSITY so I think I can !vote keep at this point. Polarpanda (talk) 13:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Passes WP:N although relatively unknown.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:33, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, easily satisfies WP:NOTE, plenty of significant coverage in secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 09:07, 10 December 2009 (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.