Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coke Boys 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 redirect to French Montana. The Bushranger One ping only 00:12, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Coke Boys Records

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per source searches, does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH. North America1000 07:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Redirect where?
 * Redirect — Fails notability standards as its own article, but is a valid search item. STATic message me!   19:46, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor (talk) 00:26, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect, most likely to the currently owning record company/label. Perhaps, within editorial discretion, insert appropriate mentions in articles of the artists and labels involved. But there seems to be insufficient to go by for an independent WP article. Martinp (talk) 13:34, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The article says two companies/lables own the brand. Which one gets the redirect? - The Bushranger One ping only 00:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Not an area I'm very familiar with, so don't have a definitive answer. My ingoing hypothesis was "to whichever one where this (sub?)brand would be meaningful enough to potentially be worth mentioning, and perhaps even reusing some of the content here in a section there". I just looked at both and didn't see an obvious answer. However, it appears (taking everything I read in the articles at face value) that it's more meaningful as an activity of French Montana, is mentioned in his article, and he is the one who signed some agreement with the 2 companies. So failing any better idea, I would redirect to French Montana. Martinp (talk) 06:27, 4 November 2017 (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.