Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DEL 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 no consensus. slakr \ talk / 13:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

DEL Records

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Apparently non-notable label; sourced solely to the subject's own website. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  02:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - I found then on Google News and added a reference to the article. Most of the reference I find are announcements involving their artists, not about the label itself. Not sure if this would be sufficient for notability. --TTTommy111 (talk) 03:54, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Argh. There was a Billboard article, but the problem was about a distribution deal for a single artist. Independent labels do become notable with heavy rosters (Beggars Banquet) and critical praise (Ralph Records) over time, but, until time passes and critics begin talking about the greatness that was Argent Records or Kama Sutra Records, they get press by having distribution deals. It sounds like this label probably has a few, and they're probably doing good work, but there isn't the comment on them yet to give an article. Hithladaeus (talk) 17:30, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article in current state does not demonstrate notability, but this is fixable.  There are a number of further sources available. , , ,  (pretty brief here), but this is enough to meet WP:GNG.    78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 20:32, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:54, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:32, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep, I can see a few more articles relating to this in music-trade magazines. Also let's look at this from the Mexican communities view. It's possibly more of notable-value to them than say Anglo. But that being the case can actually make it more notable when you have a good think about it. Article needs a lot of work to get it up to scratch as well. I'm in agreement with  78.26  , Thanks, Karl Twist 11:03, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. I see that this year the label picked up 4 Premio Lo Nuestro awards. Gerardo Ortiz received 3 awards which included 1 for Mexican album of the year and Luis Coronel was Mexican Male Artist of the year. Not bad for a fledgling label! Hope this helps. thanks, Karl Twist Karl Twist (talk) 11:18, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  18:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Further to my Keep vote, I'd like to add that knowing a bit about Cali labels and stuff, I can see the potential in this. I've done a bit of research. Well maybe not that much as I should. I can see there's a lot more to add to this article. I was going to do some work on it but I decided to hold off to see if anyone else is going to put in effort. In it's present state it possibly isn't that obvious to some unfamiliar with certain aspects of the label that there's notability so a few need to do a bit of work. I might but I'll wait for a bit. OK Karl Twist (talk) 08:55, 29 June 2015 (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.