Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4th Wall Theatre, Inc.

: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. Stifle (talk) 13:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[4th Wall Theatre, Inc.]]=

:{{la|4th Wall Theatre, Inc.}} ([{{fullurl:4th Wall Theatre, Inc.|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4th Wall Theatre, Inc.}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Contested PROD. A couple links have been added since PRODing, but from small-town newspapers. Questionable notability, as well as COI/spam issues, looking at the names of the two main article contributors. GlassCobra 01:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

:Comment: Perhaps this should be improved. I don't whether to say "keep" or "delete" at this point. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 03:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Major trim, merge, and redirect to Bloomfield, New Jersey.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 05:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

:Comment: Bloomfield, NJ is the town that this theatre company resides in. Merging it with the town article may not be the best solution as they are only one portion of the town (much like other theatre organizations listed on Wikipedia who have seperate articles than the town they are in.)This group has been in existence for over ten years and is a vital part of the community. 05:32, 2 January 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by GregAGoldston (talk • contribs)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Weak Keep and Strong Rewrite Notability is, admittedly, marginable -- but I think a solid rewrite could bring forth an adequate entry. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep as notability is now shown, but clean up. Boston (talk) 01:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep - sources are adequate, subject is worthwhile. Wily D 12:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep passes WP:ORG. Has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. -Atmoz (talk) 17:54, 12 January 2009 (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.