Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arena Rock Recording Company


 * 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 no consensus‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Arena Rock Recording Company

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Preliminary WP:BASIC WP:BEFORE check did not find significant independent coverage in reliable sources in the perspective of our guidelines WP:NCORP, WP:GNG and WP:ORGIND and I don't believe this company is notable enough to have an entry here. WP:INHERITORG clearly shows association with notable people do not implicitly make it notable by association. Sources must directly cover the article subject in question. Graywalls (talk) 23:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Organizations, Business, Companies,  and Oregon. Graywalls (talk) 23:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Analysis of the amount of independent and reliable source material available about this company would be very helpful. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:16, 1 August 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Despite the insistences of the nominator (in other recent AfDs), there is no reason to ignore music expertise in assessing the encyclopedic value of music-related articles, and so WP:MUSIC's sense of an important indie label applies here. Arena Rock certainly qualifies as one of them, and their roster (of several dozen important artists) is of substantial importance to telling the story of independent rock music in the 2000s. NOTINHERITED, I maintain as I have elsewhere, is a red herring; labels are only notable for releasing notable music, and for no other reason! There are no WP:V issues in demonstrating the roster, and the article has some sourcing to boot; there's even a category for this label, complementing the list and helping serve the Wiki's information-provision function by interlinking the bands that share this label (which can't be done any other way than through a label list or label category). Chubbles (talk) 00:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Policy based arguments are encouraged and these run of the mill articles are why notability guidelines exist. While your argument of evaluating record labels through a different lens is your personal take on this, this is not backed by community consensus developed policy and you're welcome to start an RFC persuading the community to make record labels unlike others. Graywalls (talk) 02:46, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment again there's even a category for this label created by none other than this single purpose that edited for about two years only about things related to ARRCO. The account appears to have been controlled by the company or a public relations editing service. @Chubbles, were you aware of these edits likely made for PR purposes? Graywalls (talk) 19:46, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't like promotional editing, but it is irrelevant to determining notability or encyclopedic importance. Lots of people who turn out to be notable write their own articles; it's lamentable, but sometimes produces good ends, and a commonsense category listing is a good end. Certainly, this is a record label I'd heard of before I even started editing here, so this is not a case of me being "hoodwinked" by some promotional account. Chubbles (talk) 15:42, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.