Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Revolver Music: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 04:52, 13 November 2007 editShalom Yechiel (talk \| contribs)26,380 edits →Revolver Music: del← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 07:06, 1 March 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk \| contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB
(12 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
			:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
			<!--Template:Afd top

			Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->


			The result was '''Keep''' --] 01:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
	===]===		===]===
	{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD\|O}}

	:{{la\|Revolver Music}} – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude>		:{{la\|Revolver Music}} – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude>
	Org. that fails to establish notability ] 18:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)		Org. that fails to establish notability ] 18:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
	*'''Delete''' per nom. ] (] • ]) 04:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)		*'''Delete''' per nom. ] (] • ]) 04:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

			<hr style="width:50%;"/>
			:<span style="color:Chocolate;">'''Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.'''</span><br/><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ''']''' 05:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->

			*'''Delete''': Non notable. - ] (]) 06:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' - Neither ] nor ] have notability guidelines for labels (which is kind of a shame), but WP:MUSIC does state as a notability guideline for artists: "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)." In the list of artists on the label I see quite a few notable artists: ], ], ], etc. I think this is sufficient to establish the label as an important label, and thus a notable label. It absolutely does have to be cleaned-up though. ] (]) 09:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			* '''Delete''' seems non-notable to me -- <strong>]</strong>] 10:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			:Please expand on your reasoning. - ]\|] 16:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			*'''Strong Keep''' It is clearly notable, having signed some of the biggest indie bands in the UK in the late 80's and 90's. ] (]) 12:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			*'''Strong keep'''. They have distribution and they have signed notable bands. That makes the label clearly notable. - ]\|] 16:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			*'''Commment''' most of the Google searches for "Revolver Music" + "Paul Birch" or "Revolver Music" + "Stone Roses" come back to WP (or mirrors). The only vaguley reliable hit was this page that states RM was formed in 1985, not 1979 as claimed by the current article. ] (]) 17:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' There is no reason to delete it. It's also notable. --] (]) 17:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
			* '''Keep''' Revolver -> Silvertone is-to Stone Roses :: Sub Pop -> Geffen is-to Nirvana. Needs cleanup, not delete. ] 19:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

			:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 07:06, 1 March 2023

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 --JForget 01:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Revolver Music

Org. that fails to establish notability Lugnuts 18:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 04:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh 05:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Delete: Non notable. - Rjd0060 (talk) 06:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Keep - Neither WP:N nor WP:MUSIC have notability guidelines for labels (which is kind of a shame), but WP:MUSIC does state as a notability guideline for artists: "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)." In the list of artists on the label I see quite a few notable artists: The Stone Roses, UK Subs, Jane's Addiction, etc. I think this is sufficient to establish the label as an important label, and thus a notable label. It absolutely does have to be cleaned-up though. Torc2 (talk) 09:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete seems non-notable to me -- Anonymous Dissident 10:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Please expand on your reasoning. - Mgm| 16:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Strong Keep It is clearly notable, having signed some of the biggest indie bands in the UK in the late 80's and 90's. scope_creep (talk) 12:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Strong keep. They have distribution and they have signed notable bands. That makes the label clearly notable. - Mgm| 16:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Commment most of the Google searches for "Revolver Music" + "Paul Birch" or "Revolver Music" + "Stone Roses" come back to WP (or mirrors). The only vaguley reliable hit was this page that states RM was formed in 1985, not 1979 as claimed by the current article. Lugnuts (talk) 17:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Keep There is no reason to delete it. It's also notable. --businessman332211 (talk) 17:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Keep Revolver -> Silvertone is-to Stone Roses :: Sub Pop -> Geffen is-to Nirvana. Needs cleanup, not delete. --- tqbf 19:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

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.