Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/24 Hour Service Station


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 11:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

24 Hour Service Station

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I can't find significant coverage for this record label. Joe Chill (talk) 03:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither can I.  Nor does it appear to be a useful redirect, nor is there content that can usefully be merged elsewhere; in fact, I can see no hope at all for this content.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  08:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion. A variety of tags can be added to articles to note the problem.  The GUIDES on deletion say "If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so."  I have edited this page to include several sources to prove that this Record Label has Notabiltiy through the referenced newspaper and magazine articles.  "The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself have actually considered the Record Label notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it."  This Record Label, 24 Hour Service Station has had several magazines and newspapers that have "written and published" articles that "focus" on the label.  This press coverage has been listed in the references for Verifiability and more will be added.  This page is still a work in progress.  I disagree with the "consideration of deletion"  Wikinubot (Wikinubot) 11:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - but it might be rescued. There are lots of sources that can be found in the Internet about this label.  However, I've identified a couple of problems with sourcing.  One, searches using Google and similar engines will find lots of false hits, because the label's name is similar to a phrase.  Second, many news sources have only trivial mentions of the label, usually along the lines of "recording artist" and mentioning the label.  Third, many of the sources point to local pride in Tampa about the label.  So at the least, it is notable locally.   It does have some notable bands signed to it.  Bearian (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  22:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak keep - current sourcing is sufficient to establish local notability. Since there is no consensus that local sources are insufficient to establish Wikipedia notability, the subject meets a literally reading of WP:N.  That combined with a couple notable artists being signed to the label is sufficient for inclusion, IMO. I am qualifying my "keep" with "weak" since all significant sources appear to be local in nature. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:38, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. allen四names 05:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per notability and sources.--Judo112 (talk) 08:42, 25 September 2009 (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.