Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tess (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 Delete. I was going to add a sentence to Tess of the d'Urbervilles as suggested, but I could not find any independent reliable source (at the article or in a search) to verify the information. If someone else wants to add a sentence, be my guest. --MelanieN (talk) 02:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Tess (musical)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails the "significant coverage in reliable sources" of WP:GNG with only one, unclear secondary source - something on a "local people, local stories" local radio show which is currently inaccessible. McGeddon (talk) 19:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. A google news and google books search revealed no reliable tertiary sources.4meter4 (talk) 20:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Other than the one BBC interview that has now been identified, my searches revealed no independent sources about this project, or any indication that reliable sources have reported any public performances or recordings. I don't think a single example of local radio coverage is enough to establish notability for a not yet produced stage play.  The deprodder also mentions "searchable Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other social media trails" that "confirm public interest", but these are not the kinds of independent reliable sources that we require to show that a subject warrants an article.  Perhaps this is a case of WP:TOOSOON: if and when the production receives multiple independent press reviews or other significant coverage, we can revisit this. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Insufficient coverage. Could be mentioned in a sentence under Tess of the d'Urbervilles, which lists other musical adaptations, but this content is too extensive for a straight merge. Colapeninsula (talk) 16:53, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and maybe mention at Tess of the d'Urbervilles as suggested; my searches found nothing to suggest solid independent notability with the best of my searches here and here. SwisterTwister   talk  19:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 4 July 2015 (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.