User:78.26/sandbox

Sundries



Category:Administrative backlog

Category:Expired proposed deletions

Earwig's copyvio detector

v r d

WP Record Labels list

Template messages/Sources of articles

WP:ALBUM/REVSITE

Speedy_deletions

Requested_pictures

List of online newspaper archives

saw/pbuh

Article alerts/Subscribing

Special:Contributions/MadmanBot

Requested articles/music/Classical composers

Article

Google news archives

duplication detector

Special:ListUsers

WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/ADB 27

afd stats

rfa stats

User:78.26/CSD log

User:78.26/PROD log

Special:Log/78.26

Category:Requests for unblock

Record label AFD search for User:Ivanvector/Record labels AfD survey.

User:Teblick/Online Resources for Old-Time Radio Research [Google Newspapers Archive]

Editor Interaction Analyzer

record label standards
(from Articles for deletion/430 West Records) Keep. The nominator seems to be asking for a referendum on the notability of record labels, having nominated a dozen or so, nearly all of which I believe are worth keeping. WP:CORP is a silly straitjacket to be judging independent record labels by. Let's think about what makes record labels noteworthy (in the real world). Well, what they do is put out records; people know and care about them because of the music they put out into the world. The story, then, is the artists much more often than the label, and news agencies know this, which is why they very rarely write full articles about labels; in fact, they almost never do this in comparison with how much they write about musicians. They generally do this only for major labels (whose business is large enough to make the financial papers) and labels which become so venerable and storied as to be iconic (Blue Note, Sun, etc.) such that they begin to acquire book-length treatments. (from Chubbles, then he repeats below)

(from AfD Skunk Records) What is really needed is for WP:MUSIC to come up with a standard of worth for labels which have a clear cultural importance based upon the music they release. Which it actually does, buried in the artists' section - a label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of many notable musicians. This is not circular and does not violate WP:NOTINHERITED, as is often claimed; the notability of the artist is not based upon whether or not the label has an article, although this is sometimes used as a lazy shorthand. There are many labels without articles that fit these criteria. Much as we do with artists who are members of more than one clearly notable band but who are not themselves the subject of extensive news coverage, I think it is sensible to do the same with labels. Maybe not for one or two notable bands, but if a label has or had a roster of half a dozen or a dozen notable acts, this is evidence of cultural importance. The actual number and length of time to "pass muster" can be decided on case-by-case bases, but it's thoroughly destructive to go about deleting plainly important things based upon a Procrustean yardstick. Chubbles (talk) 11:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

also see Articles for deletion/New Orleans Records
 * Articles for deletion/Kung Fu Records
 * Articles for deletion/Afternoon Records (3rd nomination)

AfC search
File:ConversationWithAMule.png

78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 01:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

78.26  (spin me / revolutions)

WikiProject Discographies/style