Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top Dog Theatre


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:25, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Top Dog Theatre

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

fails WP:ORG. looks a bit like an advert. hardly any third party coverage. . we don't have articles on every local amateur theatre company. LibStar (talk) 05:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Seems no more notable than any number of amateur theatre groups, none of which are sufficiently notable for a wiki article. (Talk Contribs) 23:09, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:N Jeepday (talk) 23:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep, meets WP:N. The Press website has 3 fairly trivial mentions, but the ChCh Libraries website Papers Index / Subject search says "'Top Dog Theatre Company.' occurs 41 times", and the Highbeam article linked in the article looks to be in-depth. XLerate (talk) 00:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, I agree it meets WP:N, and I don't see why amatuer theatre companies are inherently non noteable. But I also agree it needs a rewrite to sound less like a promo.Winstonwolfe (talk) 03:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, the theatre was recognized with an award by a local newspaper, "Best Theatre-Runner Up", that makes it notable in my view. --Mdukas (talk) 08:09, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * being a runner up in a local competition does not meet WP:ORG. you're simply inventing criterion for notability, WP:ORG or WP:GNG applies here. LibStar (talk) 12:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep, meets WP:N. Just because they are amateur doesnt make them not notable (talk)
 * 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.