Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burning Coal Theatre Company


 * 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   no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 01:19, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Burning Coal Theatre Company

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems like an unreferenced advert. Tagged for notability for 5 years. Boleyn (talk) 16:27, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete, no prejudice to being rewritten The notability tag was added as a drive-by with no explanation on the talk page or in the edit comment, and the tagger never made another edit to the article.  On Google, I saw hits that would merit more attention, so there is a preliminary presumption of notability.  If being tagged for five years with a notability tag was a concern, the tag could have been removed.  With the total failure of WP:V, there is no verifiable material to salvage.  The component that is promotional tone means that the article should not be incubated.  Unscintillating (talk) 03:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, the user who tagged it for notability years ago was banned for disruptive editing around that same time, although, seeing the article now, I too have to question notability. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 15:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak delete Would have to go with delete here for now. May be notable, but can't really tell. I looked on Google and don't really see coverage of the group in anything more than upcoming performances mentions and a few performance reviews that are not really notable, in my opinion. Others are just mentions that they exist. Not widespread coverage and can't tell that they have won any awards apart from a local weekly paper's mention back in 2000. Being around for 16 years or so might lend some weight, but can't really say keep just because of that, I don't know. If any more sources are found or awards won, it could always be recreated in the future. Will keep looking. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 15:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep this theater company has been covered in a reasonably notable blog BroadwayWorld.com and has also been covered in some books beyond the typical directory type entrys. RadioFan (talk) 01:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:24, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 03:53, 27 January 2013 (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.