Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Rude Mechanicals


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 15:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

The Rude Mechanicals
This is a theatre company out of Washington D.C.; however, the article fails to show any notability. James084 21:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Out of the Washington, D.C. area (specifically, Laurel, Maryland, which is also noted); their official website is listed at the bottom of the page (http://www.rudemechanicals.com) and their listing at PotomacStages.com is also noted. What other notation is needed?Scarletsmith 21:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:Vanity, unimportant. If they had won a prestigious national award for something they did, fine. Well-written article, but it belongs on a local or regional forum, not Wikipedia.Cdcon 22:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable community theatre group. No Guru 22:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, then redirect to Midsummer Night's Dream (or write a separate article on those characters, they're more notable as most Pokemon). -R. fiend 23:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and then redirect to A Midsummer Night's Dream. Postdlf 00:41, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep There are over 500 google hits for "rude mechanicals" AND "washington dc". It looks like most of those hits refer to this group.  Besides, I thought it was a fun and interesting read. Weak keep After doing a little bit more research, it seems like there are no less than three American theatre companies called the "Rude Mechanicals."  Only about half of the previously mentioned Google hits actually refer to this specific group.  They did earn a mention in the Washington Post, though, so they're still borderline notable in my book. Plus, I still think it's a fun and interesting read. :) Zagalejo 03:07, 21 January 2006 (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.