Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Penny Dreadful Players

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. Careful analysis of the references and strong arguments against this article meeting any group notability criteria hold more weight than the counter-arguments. IronGargoyle 04:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Penny Dreadful Players

Penny Dreadful Players (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Apparent advert (see early revisions), no assertion of notability. The Anome 08:55, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete vanity piece as it stands, needs sources. --Oscarthecat 09:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
• Hmm..."See early revisions"? You mean, if someone writes something stupid, and I fix it, it should still be thrown out, because the early revisions are bad? Yes, the group doesn't get wikipedia. Yes, I tried to help them in spite of themselves. The fact that they're clueless shouldn't affect how we treat an article about them. For notability, the very fact that they're a 15 year old theatre group at a well-known university would count, wouldn't it? There is a huge shortage of articles in Category:Student theatre. If this isn't an appropriate article topic, what would be? (sorry for the snippy tone, I seem to have wasted a lot of time on this group) Stevage 11:42, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The improvement to the article since early revision is considerable, but looking at the current version of the article, does it meet the WP:BIO criteria, in particular the sections on "entertainment groups" and "creative professionals" ? For example, if they have made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment let's get this added to the article and a source cited. --Oscarthecat 12:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think BIO applies here, it's an organisation, not a collection of named or otherwise related people. Stevage 16:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Then WP:CORP would apply, with the same effect. -- The Anome 19:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I would like to ask that our page not be deleted. If an individual can have a wiki page, so should a group at a well-known University. We are currently working on getting more sources, but already have more that we originally did. This group is relevant to topics such as University of Illinois and student-theater, and will be a good source for prospective students wondering what activities there are to do at the University, as well as the 40,000 current students, and countless alumni. If anyone has any other suggestions for the page, we'd love to hear them. Thank you.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.79.8.12 (talk • contribs)

The rules for inclusion are quite clear -- please see WP:CORP -- and at the moment the supporting cites supplied don't seem to me to meet the WP:CORP criteria. For example, self-published sources cannot be used to ascertain notability, and student magazines are typically not regarded as mainstream sources, or we would need to have an article about every student society at every college. Six of the external links that you have supplied all appear to use the same publishing software and page layout and all appear to be online student publications which are affiliates of one another. (Please see Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Penny Dreadful Players for an analysis of the external links provided.) What Wikipedia is not has more information about using Wikipedia for promotional purposes. -- The Anome 17:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out that the Daily Illini , from which a number of the sources hail, is a legitimate newspaper in existence since 1871. In the champaign-urbana community it is mainstream media. the buzz magazine is a weekly entertainment magazine inserted into the Daily Illini. whether these articles are enough to ascertain notability, i don't know.-- Supermackin 21:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

It's still a student-run newspaper (albeit a long-established one), reporting on its local student drama society. Anyway, regardless of all this, no-one has yet, as far as I can tell, made any assertion that the Penny Dreadful Players have had any "notable and demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education" outside their local community, other than that which might be expected of any university drama society, of which there are thousands worldwide? -- The Anome 21:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Non notable, advert, vanity, etc. G1ggy! _{Review me!} 07:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Colleges are generally notable, though college-affiliated groups need to show that they have received special coverage in external media, in my opinion, before they deserve articles. The sources provided so far don't appear to meet the test, since they amount to saying 'This group is famous all over campus.' I'm impressed by the analysisis of the sources done by User:Anome above and reported on the Talk page of this AfD. His quotations from policy are convincing as well. EdJohnston 17:42, 7 June 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.