Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inherit the truth

:{{la|Inherit the truth}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Inherit_the_truth Stats])

:({{Find sources|Inherit the truth}})

Non-notable college production - not significant or cover in reliable sources in any depth. Cameron Scott (talk) 09:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

:*Hmm... the specific production itself probably isn't notable, but I'm finding things to show that the play itself might be. I'll see what I can find.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 13:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

• Delete without prejudice against it being re-created about the play rather than the amateur film. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:31, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect to Scopes trial#Stage and film. I found some sources about the film/play, but not enough to where it shows that this is so overwhelmingly notable that it needs its own article. Really, the article is currently only about 2-3 sentences long because that's all the information I had about it. I'm going to suggest redirecting it to the section in the Scopes Trial article about the stage and film adaptations because it's notable enough to be a mention, but not notable enough to warrant an article devoted to it. It's already mentioned in that section and I've ported over sources from the play's article, so there's no reason why this can't be a redirect (once the title's been fixed to be properly capitalized, of course).Tokyogirl79 (talk) 13:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
• Redirect per Tokyogirl's excellent work. --MelanieN (talk) 15:38, 25 June 2012 (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.