Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love Horse

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. Secret ^account 14:36, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Love Horse[edit]

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

Non-notable play by a non-notable author. Originally appears to have been created by the playwright to promote a London fringe production that opens tomorrow. I have removed the cruft and the copyvio already. Nancy ^talk 12:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nom. Non-notable, self promotion. Angryapathy (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per [1], [2], and [3]. ~~By the way, my searches show that Bryn Magnus is also notable.~~ Joe Chill (talk) 02:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding the reviews Joe, however those sites will typically cover everything that is put on in London from the National Theatre to the back room of a pub so are not a great statement of notability, barely a step above a listing in fact. What we really need here is a review from a national newspaper such as The Times or even the Daily Mail or a piece from a recognised critic. Nancy ^talk 12:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Nancy put the words together that I was unable to. I didn't really find those sources to be indicators of notability, as Nancy says, they will publish reviews of all productions. I would also like to see some more reliable and independant sources regarding this play. Angryapathy (talk) 16:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Zero hits on Google News archive for "Love Horse" + Magnus. While Magnus himself is a noted playwright, this particular play seems to have come in well under the radar, and notability is not inherited. RGTraynor 09:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to the playwright. Notability is not inherited by simply being related to a person (which is where it originally came from), but a play that is the work of a noted playwright is notable itself because it is CREATED by them and not just randomly connected. If a plays that "come in under the radar" aren't covered, we wouldn't even have complete coverage of William Shakespeare. Even the Bard has written obscure plays. We also have notability guidelines that state films with notable people working on them and bands with notable members are notable. Plays are just another creative work these rules could be extended to. In this particular case, there doesn't appear to be enough information to write an article yet, so merging the single line is the best solution. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

actually, i think you will find a large amount of academic criticism on even the most obscure of Shakespeare's. But there are only a few authors for whom that can be safely assumed. DGG ( talk ) 05:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bryn Magnus is currently a redlink so at this moment there is no article to merge/redirect to. Nancy ^talk 06:08, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That can be dealt with by making the article, using this as a start. DGG ( talk ) 14:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well obviously! I didn't intend my observation to suggest otherwise hence use of words "currently" and "at the moment" :) Nancy ^talk 15:14, 10 December 2009 (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.