Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/555 Recordings


 * 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   delete. Spartaz Humbug! 07:21, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

555 Recordings

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article about a corporation was prodded, but the prod was disputed by User:Chubbles citing the fifth bullet point of WP:MUSIC. This article is about neither a musician nor musical ensemble, so WP:MUSIC doesn't apply. WP:CORP does, however, and the subject of this article doesn't meet the guidelines for notability in that standard. Mikeblas (talk) 15:23, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep as prod remover. I don't follow why some claim record labels should fall under WP:CORP, any more than a band or musician should fall under WP:CORP. (Both, after all, are businesses.) This is about a cultural institution that disseminates works of art, and should be determined notable or non-notable by the artistic community, not the business community. WP:MUSIC bullet 5 speaks of artist notability in terms of labels that have been around for more than a few years and have a roster of significant/notable artists; this makes them culturally important labels and therefore encyclopedic, and this label meets that definition. Chubbles (talk) 17:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Explanation. It should be pretty simple to understand. Let me try to help: WP:MUSIC says it applies to musicians and musical ensembles. It doesn't claim to apply to anything else. As a record label is neither a musician or a performing musical ensemble, we apply WP:CORP to record companies to determine their notability. I hope that helps you. -- Mikeblas (talk) 20:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, for now Right now there are no references, so there is no wp:indication of wp:notability of any type under any guideline.   Looking at the what they've done and the history, I think it's pretty clear they could easily establish notability under the general guideline, if somebody were to turn this into a real article with real references, neither of which is the case at the moment. North8000 (talk) 19:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Question How long is now? The article has been unreferenced for more than three years, and viable references apparently aren't available. Anything I can find is just an enumeration of the label's small catalog. WP:NOTDIR.-- Mikeblas (talk) 13:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   09:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)




 * Delete. No independent reliable sources (including the two external links), and all I could find in a Google search were mentions in Wikipedia and retailer/promotional web sites.  Thus, no indication of notability.   Rich wales (talk · contribs) 21:00, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 10:23, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I didn't see any notable sources on Google, Google News and Yahoo search. SwisterTwister  talk  00:31, 23 August 2011 (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.