Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hurt Locker (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 no consensus. (WP:NPASR). (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hurt Locker (musical)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Looks like a hoax [1]. Of course, we may have articles about notable hoaxes, but this one presents the subject as it was real. By the way, not sure if this hoax is notable itself. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:08, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is NOT a hoax. This is a REAL FAKE musical, same as any other musical that can be found in Category:Fictional musicals. Lockher (talk) 19:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Strong delete~~. No evidence of any real-world notability or coverage outside of the work of fiction. —C.Fred (talk) 20:56, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There is some mention of this in various sources ([2], [3]), but I can't see where it's notable outside of the musical. I think that it'd be best to add a mention of this in the section about the Broadway performance of HatAI and just redirect there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:13, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually... I can somewhat see the rationale for having a separate article. There has been quite a bit of coverage so far and some of it has specifically focused on the fake Playbills. I don't know that it's specifically enough for a separate article at this point in time, though. It's certainly enough for a section on the main article for the musical- I think that I'll add a section in the article somewhere and suggest redirecting there for now. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hedwig_and_the_Angry_Inch_(musical)#Broadway_premiere for now, anyway. This has gained enough coverage to where it should be mentioned somewhere, especially since it impacts HatAI, but I don't know that the coverage has been so heavy that it would really merit its own entry right now. If this is used in future productions and/or continues to get some mention in various sources, then it'd certainly merit its own page in the future. Since we can't predict that other productions or runs will use this, I recommend redirecting to the main article with the history intact. If/when that coverage comes, we can always un-redirect and have the article history to pull from. It's pretty close and if the consensus is to keep the article I certainly won't argue, but I just feel that this falls just slightly short of what we'd need right now. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:25, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Thank you to Tokyogirl79 for providing the links to reliable sources and the context about the musical. I'm thinking it is best to keep the material around, at least in history. We can have a separate discussion of whether to let it stand alone or merge it into the Hedwig and the Angry Inch (musical) article. And time may tell: it's still pretty new, but it may yet gain the level of cultural familiarity that Springtime for Hitler has. —C.Fred (talk) 16:53, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm personally hoping that someone will actually make it. It sounds like it'd be a scream, especially if they do dance numbers. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:56, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to add to the article this official audio from the musical, but it was deleted. Lockher (talk) 20:14, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did you follow the directions at WP:SAMPLE? You could probably ask for help there or at WP:CQ. I think that CQ is pretty much for images, but they'd probably be able to help you with audio uploads. I'm not as familiar with audio uploads as I am with image uploads for movie posters and whatnot. I'd probably hold off on uploading anything until after the AfD is closed, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 00:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:04, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:44, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (babble) @ 20:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.