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. While there's been a vigorous discussion of Google's usefulness, sources showing notability, online or otherwise, still haven't appeared. Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Star Theatre Arts[edit]

Northern Star Theatre Arts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

• New school, little or no evidence of WP:Notability via Google. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What does google know?--Ipatrol (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • But this isn't an obscure topic like ancient Estonian gods. If a theater school has achieved note, you can bet it'll be mentioned online. Compare Stella Adler Studio of Acting#References and "Stella Adler Studio of Acting" (though this I am not in any way proposing this as a minimum standard). —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • You'd be surprised. In my time on Wikipedia I've tried to cover several plays and even relatively new television series and I literally came up blank when it comes to Google. When plays and films stop showing often the online presence disappears. I wouldn't be surprised if a theatre school is only covered in dead tree sources. - Mgm|^(talk) 23:08, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I see a lawyer looking at me. The essay states that google is not a reliable way to judge notability, it says or implies nothing about that certain topics would have a more reliable google search than others.--Ipatrol (talk) 22:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • It's says it isn't a guarantee it also acknowledges that it's useful. The key, as with many similar resources, is to be mindful of the limitations. And no, I'm not a lawyer, and you should read WP:CIVIL before accusing someone else of being one. —Largo Plazo (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Reads like an advertisement. Notability is not confirmed. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - More promotional than anything, fails WP:N too. — neuro^(talk) 09:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I made an honest effort to find any notable coverage of the children's theatre group. There's just nothing out there. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 05:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - too new to be notable. Bearian (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2008 (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.