Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virtual Reality (play)

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 redirect to Alan Ayckbourn. Randykitty (talk) 10:56, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual Reality (play)

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

The play is not published or available for production. The only source is a primary source, and a quick internet search didn't find any others.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Hoof Hearted (talk) 17:19, 19 August 2015 (UTC) Hoof Hearted (talk) 17:19, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect to Alan Ayckbourn (which would probably be best) as my searches found nothing particularly good but probably enough to for redirect, here and here (these two the best results I found). SwisterTwister talk 06:13, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 16:30, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - I agree with SwisterTwister, enough there to redirect to Alan Ayckbourn. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:38, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Comment Using these searches I found a couple of notable reviews (inc.Billington, Gdn), though probably this should still go to Alan Ayckbourn, since it would not be enough for its own page. Pincrete (talk) 22:06, 10 September 2015 (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.