Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mrs. Bob Cratchit's Wild Christmas Binge

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. So Why 17:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs. Bob Cratchit's Wild Christmas Binge

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

Nominated by an unregistered user. Their rationale, taken from Talk:Mrs. Bob Cratchit's Wild Christmas Binge, is as follows: This article has no references to reliable sources. Delete.2001:A61:3222:6201:D99:5CAD:E6:3AEA (talk) 03:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC) clpo13_(talk) 18:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 18:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 18:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 18:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 06:04, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:45, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no reason given rhat establishes notability. Legacypac (talk) 19:14, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - i've found various reviews including these three, but I'm not sure if there are specific guidelines for musicals/theatre. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:29, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Enough significant reviews exists in WP:RS to substantiate WP:GNG notability. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:28, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - While the ip is correct that in its current form the citations suck, this is a clear case of WP:BEFORE not being performed. A cursory search turned up significant reviews and coverage. Rather than add them here, which provides zero help once the discussion is closed, will add them to the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:53, 18 June 2017 (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.