Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Trial of God

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 keep. (non-admin closure) BusterD (talk) 02:07, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The Trial of God

The Trial of God (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

non notable play, sourced to primary sources, PROD declined Jezhotwells (talk) 00:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

• Strong Keep I've added a number of reliable sources to the article. Just clicking the links at the top of the AfD makes it clear enough. Please practice some WP:BEFORE next time. Silverseren^C 03:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• Keep Question: Should a play by Elie Weisel , winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and the Presidential Medal of Freedom which was adapted for nationwide TV broadcast on PBS , and which received detailed reviews in many reliable sources, be considered notable? One word answer: Yes. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• Keep I would think that just the fact that it's written by Elie Wiesel makes it notable, if nothing else. Would be nice to see more citations though. --JonathonSimister (talk) 08:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• Keep: How can anyone think that a work by Ellie Wiesel is non-notable? His book Night is a frequent part of school lessons including in my class for 2 years. This play isn't that book, but of course works by someone as notable as Ellie Wiesel is notable which the above shows. SL93 (talk) 21:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• Keep There appear to be sufficient reliable sources here to establish notability. Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:59, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• Keep - but not simply because of its author. I now see enough sources to warrant notability on its own.--Unionhawk ^{Talk E-mail} 14:45, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep – Topic notability has been established, per several reliable sources that qualify this topic's inclusion in Wikipedia. It appears that the nominator didn't search for sources as strongly suggested per WP:BEFORE. The nomination, as stated, appears to be based upon opinion, rather than actual topic notability. Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
• Comment: I did search for sources. Those supplied are rather mixed, Horowitz and Sanford certainly mention the play - they hardly provide substantial coverage. The other sources merely mention play readings and minor productions. Works of a notable author are not automatically notable themselves, contrary to what other editors believe. I suggest that editors actually read the notability guidelines before making statements such as "How can anyone think that a work by Ellie Wiesel is non-notable? His book Night is a frequent part of school lessons including in my class for 2 years. This play isn't that book, but of course works by someone as notable as Ellie Wiesel is notable which the above shows."; "I would think that just the fact that it's written by Elie Wiesel makes it notable, if nothing else."; "Question: Should a play by Elie Weisel , winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and the Presidential Medal of Freedom which was adapted for nationwide TV broadcast on PBS , and which received detailed reviews in many reliable sources, be considered notable? One word answer: Yes." - with regards to the point about reviews, why is there no coverage from major national newspapers? The St Petersburg Times and The Dallas Morning News are hardly major sources for dramatic criticism. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:11, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The St. Petersburg Times and The Dallas Morning News are "hardly major sources for dramatic criticism"? I would take serious issue with that characterization. These are major national newspapers. The papers are the 11th and 18th-most widely circulated in the United States. The Times is the widest-circulating paper in Florida, and the Morning News is the widest-circulating in Texas (two enormous states). Both papers have serious theater critics Lawson Taitte and John Fleming - who write on the performing arts. You can check out their extensive theater criticism resumes there.

Serious theater criticism doesn't just happen in New York. Neutrality^talk 09:02, 23 December 2011 (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.