Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audiobulb Records


 * 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 per consensus. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 22:11, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Audiobulb Records

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


 * Article is filled with WP:SELFPROMO and WP:ORIGINAL.
 * There has been an ongoing issue with WP:CoI, including usernames User:Audiobulb and User:DNewmanBulb, as well as several IP addresses located in the UK which have made a couple handful of edits over the years: User:80.168.227.8, User:80.168.226.36 and User:87.115.9.5. The owner of the company recently asked for its fanbase and roster of artists to contribute to its Wikipedia page, leading to further CoI: Facebook post link.
 * The company has not had enough WP:SIGCOV on WP:RELIABLE SOURCES (it did have some) but generally fails WP:NOTABILITY. Only 3 of its artists have Wikipedia pages (Monty Adkins, Papercutz and Ultre), and while I am not demeaning the notability of those bands, none of their releases have individual Wikipedia pages, meaning that not a single Audiobulb Records release has a Wikipedia page.
 * Many of the External links and citations used are not WP:RELIABLE SOURCES. Rasputininskia (talk) 21:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:45, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:45, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep The fact that there are no articles on albums released by Audiobulb is not really relevant - some labels are not principally album-driven, and album articles are pinged off of this site with alarming frequency anyway. The artist question is more relevant, and (at least) three notable artists is maybe not enough on its own, but it's getting there. What pushes me over is coverage - the material from Cyclic Defrost, Headphone Commute, NowThen, and this from Igloo is enough to make the difference. Chubbles (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete The fact that the owner David Newman, a musician, has been interviewed in several publication, and mentions his record company in passing during those interviews does not consist of WP:SIGCOV. The Headphone Commute and the NowThen interviews do give the company some coverage, but those alone do not amount to WP:NOTABILITY. The Cyclic Defrost interview (Link) is a perfect example of the types of sources used in the article which have no weight whatsoever; Audiobulb is simply mentioned in passing. It is not the focus of the interview and does not represent WP:SIGCOV. User:Chubbles's statement "three notable artists is maybe not enough on its own, but it's getting there" pushes me to vote delete because this company is clearly not ready for a Wikipedia page yet. The deletion of a Wikipedia page doesn't mean a subject is blocked for life; it just means that they have not achieved the notability required to warrant a Wikipedia page at this time. Once the company grows, they may be eligible for a new Wikipedia page.--Fanofblackened (talk) 18:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree with the above-mentioned Headphone Commute blog interview Link and the Now and Then blog interview Link that these are WP:RELIABLE SOURCES. But outside of that, and with those alone, there is not enough WP:SIGCOV and nothing to make up actual WP:NOTABILITY. A company needs a lot more than two interviews on webzines to generate notability. I don't see any significant importance in the scene to justify this record label having a Wikipedia page. It's an underground record label.


 * Also pointed out above is the fact that the company's owner David Newman has been interviewed a number of times, but the focus of those interviews was on his band (or solo project) Autistici. Examples like the already mentioned Cyclic Frost interview Link and the Textura interview Link are perfect examples. They only mention Audiobulb in passing. Maybe Newman, as an artist, warrants a Wikipedia page (in which case a Redirect could be placed on Audiobulb Records), but his company does not in my opinion. I'm also taking into consideration that this article was created by Newman himself in 2006 (16 years ago) and the company has yet to gain any additional notability or significant coverage. 16 years is a long time to "get there" and it probably shouldn't have been accepted on Wikipedia to begin with.--OrangeZestAir (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete This one fails WP:NOTABILITY. A record label needs more than a few interviews to achieve notability and be recognized as important or encyclopedic. I'm basing my vote on the following:
 * 1. Not a single mention of the company on Newspapers.com or The British Newspaper Archive.
 * 2. A mere 4 results show up on the Internet Archive, none of which offer WP:SIGCOV. 2 of them are listings of hundreds of record labels (Audiobulb has a small mention, or rather listing as one of them), 1 is a mention of the label in the thanklist of a Various Artists compilation released by another record label, and the last is some kind of DVD with no preview that was released by another company. Nothing here validates the notability of this company.
 * 3. No results on ISNI, VIAF, LOC, WorldCat IDs or British National Archives (it is a British record label). While this is not uncommon for small record labels, ones of any stature would have some sort of results in there, direct or indirect. WorldCat proper only lists a single release held somewhere (though the library or archive is not listed, so it could have been a manual, non-physical entry); it appears to be a Various Artists compilation released by Audiobulb. This company boasts having released over 100 releases, yet nothing is held in national archives, libraries or databases? That, to me, is a clear sign of lacking notability.
 * 4. The article is written with WP:PUFFERY and WP:NOR and reads like a press release. Attempts have been made over the years to clean up the article (including myself about a year ago) but puffery is continuously re-added by the owner in a WP:CoI. The article offers little interlinking to other Wikipedia articles other than the three bands brought up in the deletion request; no releases (be it album, EP, single, compilation, live or VA) have their own Wikipedia pages, and that would have been another good way to judge its notability. If the record label has not released anything of significance, then how can it be significant itself? I do not see this company as notable, important or encyclopedic.
 * WikiGuruWanaB (talk) 02:55, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


 * 'Delete Leaving aside the tone of the article, none of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability of this organisation, fails NCORP  HighKing++ 18:58, 4 February 2022 (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.