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. J04n(talk page) 03:41, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feel Good Musical/La Magdelena (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The play La Magdalena appears to be non-notable or nonexistent: the article has no references, and I didn't find any information about the play or its ostensible playwrights. —rybec 22:20, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Changing rationale to "redundant fork": I struck out my original nomination because the article does indeed have references; they just were not displayed (thanks to Pol430 for fixing that). I found an online abstract of one of them: [1]. I also found http://www.villalobos.ca/Magdalena which links to a Time magazine review of the play. That review names the play's creators: "music by Heitor Villa-Lobos; book by Frederick Hazlitt Brennan & Homer Curran" whereas this article says "Omer Curran and Frederick Brenna and with Villa-Lobos’s compelling compositions". I didn't realize at first that Omer and Brenna were errors. Searching for the correct names, I found Magdalena: a Musical Adventure. I want to withdraw my original nomination and instead nominate this article for deletion as a "redundant fork" because of the other article about the same play. —rybec 00:09, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. czar · · 01:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Why bring it to AfD instead of moving it back to AfC (per the banner)? czar · · 01:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article was not moved from AfC, but was instead created directly in the main space about half an hour after Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PUMP BOYS AND DINETTES/LA MAGDELENA was declined. This clearly shows that the author no longer wanted to continue using AfC for developing this article and believed it was ready for the main space. —rybec 20:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. While that is one possibility another is the submitter just made a mistake. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the balance of probability the author decided to create the article directly in the mainspace. They are entirely at liberty to do so, but they risk an AfD nomination, as has been the case here. The practice of unilaterally moving mainspace entries to AfC space (including reversing a page move) is controversial and can rightly be regarded as an out-of-process deletion method. It should be remembered that AfC exists to assist annon editors with creating articles, not to have right of veto over what will, or will not, appear in the mainspace. I'm not suggesting that it should never be done (I've done it myself), but you have to be damned sure you've judged the situation appropriately, lest it backfire. The AfC project talk page archives have several threads on the subject. Pol430 talk to me 12:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The text screams copyvio, but I can't find any evidence of it online (either with Google or the copyvio detector tool). It's also highly promotional and badly written – it reads more or less like an essay on musical theater. So badly is it written, that it would require a total hatchet job fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic. Also, the presence of the forward slash renders it a bad page title that will affect its talkpage. I have no opinion of the notability of the topic, but I feel that its problems outweigh its value, as it stands, and it would be better all round for the author to continue to work on this in the AfC namespace until such time that it can be acceptable. Pol430 talk to me 20:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I found this when I was reviewing AfC submissions, and it's horrible. Its content is not established until about three sections in, it's highly promotional, non-formal language, strange capitalization, the problems with this article are legion. The source doesn't even appear to exist. I Googled it, used JSTOR, and enlisted the help of a librarian via chat to find information about this musical. Nothing so far, although the librarian is doing a more in depth search. I expect to hear from her soon with more information. TheOneSean | Talk to me 21:51, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Decline if it isn't closed early with a move back to AFC. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Propose immediate SNOW-return-to-AFC if there is some support for no objections within 24 hours (and rybec has had an opportunity to object and chose not to). This looks like EITHER it's legit but needs verification and WP:AFC is the proper place for that to happen, it is a WP:HOAX hiding behind offline references, or a it's student's assignment, in which case WP:AFC is the best place for both this submission AND for the student's education. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per redundant fork. Sorry, I didn't catch that before making my previous comments. Forecast calls for WP:SNOW. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I honestly think this was mistakenly moved to article space before it was ready. It wasn't passed from AfC with due cause, content-wise, but the topic doesn't work either, since it forks Pump Boys and Dinettes and Magdalena: a Musical Adventure, which are both fine on their own. Also there's just nothing to merge. I'd recommend userfying this fusion-essay-thing, but I don't see how it could ever become its own article. czar · · 02:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Speedy-deletion criteria WP:A10 "Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic" may apply. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 03:10, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A10 doesn't apply to forks (if this even is one), but that doesn't mean you can't try. czar · · 03:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Redundant fork of Magdalena: a Musical Adventure. Sorry to sound harsh, but I don't think there's any text worth salvaging.1292simon (talk) 05:51, 5 May 2013 (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.