Talk:Desktop Theater

Theatre Low‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in October 2012. Further details are available here.

A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Miniapolis, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on December 29, 2013. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{copyedit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining!
Please address the following issues as well as any other cleanup tags before re-tagging this article with copyedit: Non-notable (proposed deletion)

Deletion or inclusion?

There is a PROD by User:Miniapolis on this article claiming that refs do not meet WP:42, adding that Desktop Theater is a non-notable theater group.

I am an inclusionist, but that's not the main reason I object to the proposed deletion of this article.

There are a number of reliable, independent, secondary sources, clearly indicating the notability of the subject of this article. Here are some of them, from a quick search through Google Scholar:

Glesner, Julia. "Internet Performances as Site-Specific Art." Body Space and Technology 3.
Jamieson, Helen Varley. "» From paper and ink to pixels and links «." Open Page (2001).
LaFarge, Antoinette, et al. "SHIFT-CTRL." Leonardo 35.1 (2002): 5-13.
Levin, Laura. "Avatar Happenings: Activating Liveness in Online Environments." Canadian Theatre Review 127 (2006): 11.
McCarthy, Sean. "Giving Sam a Second Life: Beckett's Plays in the Age of Convergent Media." Texas Studies in Literature & Language 51.1 (2009): 102-117.
Saltz, David Z. "‘Digital Literary Studies: Performance and Interaction." Companion to Digital Literary Studies (2013): 336-348. ISBN 978-1-405148641
St-Jacques, Marie-Douce. "Leonardo Network News." Leonardo 40.3 (2007): 314-315.
Wilson, Martha. "What Franklin Furnace learned from presenting and producing live art on the Internet, from 1996 to now." Leonardo 38.3 (2005): 193-200.

I hope to include (some of) these in the article as soon as I have some time, unless someone else does it before I get to it.

Furthermore, there seems to be a PROD on this article (in its present state) due to the fact that it was created "as part of class project". As a Wikipedian heavily involved in the education sector, it is my opinion that the failings of the original creators to adhere to WP guidelines should not be used as an argument for deletion of any article. This can be counterproductive to the many Education-related initiatives supported by the global Wikimedia movement, so I would discourage anyone from making such an argument, if at all possible.

Happy New Year! :-) --ToniSant (talk) 14:52, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:ASSIGN, and feel free to incorporate those sources into the article. The bars for verifiability and notability are the same for class projects as elsewhere in the 'pedia. Happy New Year and all the best, Miniapolis 15:41, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I see it, WP:ASSIGN is a little too cautious with regards to student contributions, however, I can fully understand some of the reasons why experienced editors would have a different perspective on student contributions than educators. Anyway, that's an argument beyond what's really going on with this article, so I'll just leave it at that, especially because I obviously agree completely with the essential need to enforce the necessary verifiability and notability standards across the board, regardless of whether students are involved or not in writing/editing an article. Thanks. --ToniSant (talk) 10:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]