Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krampus (musical)


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:34, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Krampus (musical)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable musical staged last month, referenced only by the blog of the local theatre where it was staged. There are a few local press articles on it online, but not the sort of in-depth coverage required for WP:GNG. Deleted by prod a month ago on grounds of notability. WP:SPA creator appears to have a conflict of interest, though the tone of the article isn't promotional. NeemNarduni2 (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. NeemNarduni2 (talk) 19:09, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. NeemNarduni2 (talk) 19:09, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC) Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.     </li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Krampus to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 08:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * Delete. Unnotable local production; no significant coverage in reliable sources to suggest it meets the general notability guidelines. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 10:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, though I am interested to see if this actually becomes a notable broadway production, then I'll change my consensus. edtiorEهեইдအီးËეεઈדוארई電子ಇអ៊ី전자ഇī 20:33, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Changing my vote to a Weak Keep per the sources provided. edtiorEهեইдအီးËეεઈדוארई電子ಇអ៊ី전자ഇī 04:07, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for evaluating the sources I posted! Cunard (talk) 05:58, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Although the sources are all from Columbus, they provide "significant coverage" about Krampus as required by Notability. The Columbus Dispatch is a major regional newspaper in Ohio. Cunard (talk) 08:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 02:09, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep reliable sources having been found as above, I believe WP:GNG has been passedAtlantic306 (talk) 05:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep passes GNG. Lot's of reliable sources! --<i style="color:#B00000; font-family:Casual;">MurderByDeletionism</i><sup style="color:black;">"bang!" 01:21, 2 February 2016 (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.