Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Theatre

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Theatre. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Theatre|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Theatre. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Theatre/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Theatre

Ingemar Lindh

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

Orphaned article with little amount of sources available regardless of medium to demonstrate enough notability to pass WP:GNG. Was deleted via PROD in the past only to be recreated by a single-purpose account. MimirIsSmart (talk) 12:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre and Sweden. MimirIsSmart (talk) 12:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:43, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Called the "father of collective improvisation in the dramatic arts" [1], and described here [2]. Is also indexed in the VIAF as having publications in Sweden I'd imagine there are more in the native language. Oaktree b (talk) 14:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Calafato

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

Draftify as this article still has multiple issues and it has been drafitified 2 times after the creator moved it to main space due to similar issues. Laura240406 (talk) 04:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Radio, Theatre, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PROMO. Also appears to be COI. See the list of contributions by the article's originator. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Aaron Calafato’s solo show For Profit laid the foundation for a powerful career in storytelling. That early work—which received coverage from The Chronicle of Higher Education and other independent outlets—not only brought attention to student debt but also elevated his voice as a storyteller. It led to the award-winning podcast 7 Minute Stories and The Lonely Office, Glassdoor’s flagship podcast. His storytelling has only grown in reach, credibility, and cultural relevance—this page reflects a legitimate, verifiable career. Dekayf (talk) 16:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
this is your first edit ever and your keep reason is very obviously AI generated Laura240406 (talk) 21:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
+1 - every sentence of that !vote is full of giveaways that it's ChatGPT. Vanilla Wizard 💙 22:30, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adding that the page's main author left a nearly identically phrased comment on the talk page. Even ends with "this page reflects a ...". Unnecessary conclusion statements (especially ones phrased like "this x reflects a y") are a favorite of ChatGPT's. I'm not at the point where I'd find it necessary to open a WP:SPI here because only one of the accounts has !voted, but I think it's fair to say it at least looks suspicious. Vanilla Wizard 💙 22:54, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PROMO, also not written with WP:NPOV and edited by users with WP:COI. Karl 334 ^Talk-^-Contribs 20:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ~~or draftify with delete as first preference.~~ Not sufficiently notable for a WP:BLP page. I would've leaned towards supporting draftifying, but the page history shows that the author refuses to incubate it in draftspace and keeps moving it back to mainspace despite feedback. It had to be moved back to draftspace multiple times.

The nom's contributitons also show this pre-written draft with instructions on how to create a Wikipedia account to publish it, and it contains the sentence "Disclosure: I am submitting this draft on behalf of Aaron Calafato, whom I am assisting with content submission. I am doing my best to follow Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing guidelines." Now, I can't claim to know what exactly this is. Is this Aaron Calafato instructing someone to create an account to make an article about him? Is it him or a fan asking an AI to write a page for him & copying and pasting the results? Is it the result of him paying someone to write a page for him? I don't know, and the answer doesn't really matter. In any case, there's WP:COI and WP:PROMO concerns. The multiple newly registered single-purpose accounts popping up to add gushing praise to the article or to leave AI-generated keep !votes are not helping anything either.

Vanilla Wizard 💙 22:30, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Took another cursory look at the page: the entire reflist is either 404 not founds or links to unrelated pages, the only exception being source #1. It's highly improbable that this much linkrot would happen this quickly on such a new page; yet more reason to suspect the entire page, not just the text but also the citations, is AI-generated gibberish. A quick google search for the subject also reveals the subject's videos average no more than 20 views each, despite the article describing him as a highly successful award-winning podcaster. This is very likely to be an autobiography. A computer-generated autobiography with zero salvageable bytes. I'm changing my stance from "delete or draftify" to "delete with prejudice against recreation." Vanilla Wizard 💙 12:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any 404s. Also, some of his videos have millions of views. Green960 (talk) 18:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This account was created during this deletion discussion and this reply is their first and only contribution. Yes, the references section consists almost exclusively 404 of links. As for the second part of that reply, YouTube puts "shorts" under a different section than videos, so I did not see that one when sorting his videos by most popular. The reason why I made a comment about his low view counts was because I was previously of the belief that the page could have been started by fans, but I'm now of the belief that the page was started by - and all of these random new accounts belong to - Aaron himself, making this page an WP:AUTOBIO. Creating a brand new account just to set the record straight about your view counts doesn't weaken that suspicion, it strengthens it. Vanilla Wizard 💙 23:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Well, with all due respect, your assertion feels unfounded. It’s one thing to be critical of an article’s status. That seems more than fair and in good faith. However, suggesting that multiple contributors are actually the subject themselves is speculative at best. Personally, I'm doing some research on prominent podcast storytellers, came across this conversation, and thought I’d chime in because I genuinely believe he meets the notability bar. A new account doesn’t automatically mean bad intent nor did I create other accounts. Green960 (talk) 00:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sabrina Colie

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

No sources are suitable. Not notable . BigManBiggerFrog (talk) 18:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 4. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Theatre, Jamaica, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:25, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NACTOR, no reliable sources found online. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 22:37, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per NACTOR. Only significant credit appears to be Destiny (2014 film), but that doesn't have an article yet, so this can't redirect there. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:03, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see reliable, independent sources about Colie or her performances. The film Destiny is not even listed in the Box Office Mojo site. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article does not meet the notability criteria outlined in WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. While Sabrina Colie has acting credits in films such as Destiny (2014) and Art Machine (2012), there is a lack of WP:SIGCOV in reliable, independent secondary sources that provide in-depth information about her career. The available references, including a review from Flush the Fashion, offer limited mention and do not establish notability. Unclasp4940 (talk) 02:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as lacks RS citations to support it. To note upon a quick web search though have yet to find RS. finding lots of hits from social media platforms mostly.Villkomoses (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cecil Bevan

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

A journeyman actor; fails WP:NACTOR. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Theatre, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:03, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- As far as I can tell, all of his roles were bit parts. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:12, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Did not have any major roles in any films, only minor ones per above. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 06:39, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Most roles are uncredited or minor roles, I don't see sourcing we can use. I don't find any. Oaktree b (talk) 14:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Romney Am Dram

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

Fails WP:GNG, Before search yeilds nothing. GNews yeild no result. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, Entertainment, and England. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not a single independent ref cited, and a completely WP:MILL amateur theatre group. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only bring up their website and facebook posts, which are all primary sources. What's in the article now are simple confirmation of various performances. Not meeting notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 15:38, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per WP:A7 - Literally the first thing that pops up on my end is this Wikipedia article's talk page! This fails WP:GNG and WP:MILL at the same time. JTZegers (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No notability or sources.

Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 16:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shannon Durig

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

Doesn't seem to have enough sources with SIGCOV. I found this with sparse coverage, this with moderate coverage, and this. LastJabberwocky (talk) 09:31, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Theatre, United States of America, and Kansas. LastJabberwocky (talk) 09:31, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Dance. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, there is a ton of coverage in the Kansas City Star, see [3], [4], [5]. I think that's one element of an ideal three to establish GNG. Will see if I can find dig up more. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:22, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Daily News also published a two page spread upon her 1,000th performance. I'm still probably at a Weak delete, but maybe someone else will find a bit more coverage. Maybve there is a world where this could be redirected to the musical's article, but her name isn't really there in any substantial way right now. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:37, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 02:41, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Identified coverage meets WP:N policy requirements - significant coverage in multiple (two) reliable sources. ~Kvng (talk) 00:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The NYDN is an interview, so we really only have one independent, reliable source so far, imv. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:30, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article lacks sufficient sources, on the other hand, it needs to expand the mentioned page as well.110 and 135 (talk) 06:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kaye Tuckerman

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

Non-notable. AI generated and at least some refs are fake. Polygnotus (talk) 17:56, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and can we just find some way to speedy these. Btw Polygnotus thanks for the heads up re. ANI, although the guy was blocked by the time I got there :) Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 18:09, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Theatre, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:12, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Fails WP:GNG and doesn't meet WP:NACTOR as there is only one notable role with some reviews. Redirect to Mamma Mia! (musical)#productions. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is a lot of coverage in digitised newspapers about her from her time in Mamma Mia from 2010-2012, certainly enough to meet WP:GNG. She probably also meets WP:NACTOR / WP:CREATIVE with her other performances and her nomination for the Africa Movie Academy Awards for design work on From a Whisper. I'll add sources to the article (and check out the existing ones). No, please let's not Speedy Delete articles like this - there is clear indication of notability in the text of this article; the refs could be improved, but that's the case with lots of WP articles, and is not a reason to delete. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:48, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RebeccaGreen Are you basing your !vote on the fake information in the article? I looked at your contributions and the last 7 edits are keep votes for AfDs? It looks like you believe that the article is fine but the refs need to be improved, but in reality the refs are fake and fail verification. She clearly does not meet WP:GNG or WP:CREATIVE. You could quibble about WP:NACTOR, but only because those standards are so much lower which is unfair and should be fixed. In any case, per WP:CONLEVEL such an WP:SNG cannot overrule WP:GNG. Polygnotus (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm basing my Keep !vote on what I can see in digitised newspapers (which are also available to WP editors through the Wikipedia Library). If you have looked at my contributions, you will have seen that I put a kot of time and effort into improving articles at AfD, and as I said, I will add sources to this article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 23:00, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended WP:OFFTOPIC back and forth

@RebeccaGreen Hm, OK, it was just a bit weird to see 7 keep !votes in a row. I think I am more deletionist than you are. With BLPs I am always extra careful because a bad BLP can be far more harmful than a bad article about a Pokemon. I checked the Wikipedia Library (9 results for their name between doublequotes) and I don't see any sources that can be used (a name in a list is not WP:INDEPTH). Do you have access to the source I mentioned on the talkpage? Polygnotus (talk) 23:08, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
7 Keep !votes at 20-40 minute intervals - during which I searched for sources. I don't just !vote without checking, and if I don't find much or anything in theway of sources,I !vote delete, redirect or merge. RebeccaGreen (talk) 23:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RebeccaGreen You are at 71.2% keep and I am at 87.0% delete Probably because we use AfD for different purposes; I use it to get rid of the trash while you perhaps use it to find things worth saving. Both are valid. Polygnotus (talk) 23:19, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Polygnotus:, I don't think attempting to discredit someone's vote based on anything OTHER than the merit of their contention is appropriate. Their keep/delete ration or how fast they voted does not discount their !vote.--CNMall41 (talk) 01:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 Agreed, and I didn't. As I said, I just happened to notice it and it was remarkable enough to remark upon. In the future, please be more careful before writing something like that, because implying that someone did something they clearly did not is not appropriate, especially in the context of potential false allegations of bad intentions without evidence. Polygnotus (talk) 01:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am very careful and I wrote exactly what I meant. While veiled, you asking if they based their vote on fake information was insinuating they lacked competence. You then proceeded to discuss their voting history instead of their contention. I do not agree with the !keep vote, but they are allowed to have it. You are free to address their contention, but saying things like "it's just weird" then sharing someone's AfD stats is about conduct, not content. If you have issue with my comment, please address at WP:ANI. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:30, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have to run to ANI every time someone makes a mistake. ANI is for urgent incidents or chronic, intractable behavioral problems. You just made a mistake. I can just point it out and move on. Polygnotus (talk) 01:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No mistake was made. I stand behind what I said 100%. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:33, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is allowed. I can explain something but I cannot understand it for you. Polygnotus (talk) 01:33, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinions are divided.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article was rewritten but many of the sources used do not support the claims made in the article. Polygnotus (talk) 05:17, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have edited the article, adding sources and info. I clipped the sources from Newspapers.com, so I hope they will be visible to editors who don't have a subscription. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:36, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. In a 3-decade career, this person has done one national tour, one ensemble role on Broadway, and a few short-running local productions, mostly in smaller parts. Her film career is even less impressive (being nominated for one local design award for a foreign art film does not make someone notable as a designer). Even though she got some press over the decades in local newspapers, she is a pretty WP:MILL actor. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, she also played named roles in Summer: The Donna Summer Musical on Broadway, as well as playing roles in several other musicals around Australia and in Shanghai, and in cabaret in New York and Miami. I don't think a major role in a two-year tour of Mamma Mia! (musical) in the US and Canada is run-of-the-mill - it is in fact criterion 4 of WP:MUSICBIO. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:22, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Theatre proposed deletions (PRODs)

Theatre platform (via WP:PROD on 20 March 2025)