Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Empire Lyric Players

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Mailer Diablo 12:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Empire Lyric Players

Empire Lyric Players (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

No assertion of notability beyond the fact that they get funding. Fails WP:V and WP:RS. Only 137 Ghits, and if google knows something I don't about multiple non-trivial references to this lot from multiple reputable sources, it's not telling me. No reason why what seems like a minor Gilbert-and-Sullivan-performing troupe should be intrinsically notable: there are plenty of those around. Moreschi Deletion! 10:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. Community theatre groups are generally not notable according to WP:MUS and WP:ORG, and this one has no particularly notable aspect. The city's article can, of course, mention such theatre groups. -- Ssilvers 16:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete endorsing Moreschi's search results. There are a very large number of amateur operatic companies. Guy (Help!) 20:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep the information in Wikipedia, either as a standalone article or by merging or renaming as an article for community activities. Even if a single group isn't noteworthy, community activities collectively in a major city can be, and this article would make a good start for a collection of information on them. Fg2 04:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Per nom. --Folantin 08:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - This article provides no verifiable sources to establish notability. However, someone has spent time on this article, and it not just worthless spam. If a short newspaper review or three could be quoted or at least references, I would advise applying very liberal standards regarding notability.Shaundakulbara 09:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment I did much websurfing to see if I could find a theatre review or anything about them. They appear in various directories of theater groups but I couldn't find anything else. I don't know how the hell they could be in business for 50 years and stay under the radar. I am amazed at their un-noability. Shaundakulbara 22:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Longstanding organisation but not a notable one. -- Derek Ross | Talk 23:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No evidence that this organisation is more notable than any of its peers. WMMartin 15:41, 26 January 2007 (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.