Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DinuraCreations (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Several editors are arguing to keep, but nobody has supplied the sources needed to establish WP:N. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

DinuraCreations
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject fails WP:NCOMPANY and WP:GNG. It lacks any in-depth third-party news, magazines or journals sources. The sources cited are not independent or reliable sources and only establish that the record label exists, not that it is notable. These are the same reasons given in the previous AfD and have not been addressed by the article's creator. Dan arndt (talk) 07:37, 6 August 2017 (UTC) Dan arndt (talk) 07:37, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 07:39, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 07:41, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 07:41, 6 August 2017 (UTC) to

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Please read the article's talk page before you make a decision. Thank you. Lkartlv (talk) 08:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  13:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt same reasons that applied in 2015 apply today: there is absolutely no evidence it meets the general guideline of WP:N in sourcing. Google News turns up exactly zero sources for me, and I don't see any claim to it in the article. Salting should apply because this is the third creation of the series of articles, and the creator has not provided us with any reason to expect it would be notable in the future. Any future creations would likely simply be a waste of further time. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:12, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep this version looks different and reliable sources are found. Ariyaratnecol (talk) 06:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment what reliable sources? The first three references are from websites, that do not provide any adequate levels of editorial oversight or author credibility (i.e. user generated), with the first obviously supplied by the company itself. The last reference is also a self-published source, provided directly by the company. Dan arndt (talk) 00:27, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - non notable organization--L Manju (talk) 02:29, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - It would be useful for readers to keep this article which is within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka to cover music of Sri Lanka. Dinuraeditions (talk) 02:40, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - note to closing editor(s) has an un disclosed conflict of interest in respect to this article. Dan arndt (talk) 03:35, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947(c) (m) 04:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete & salt -- a 100% promo article on a record label with no indication of notability or significance. Such content is excluded per WP:NOTSPAM. Does not meet WP:CORPDEPTH & notability is not inherited from the notable artists. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep & copy edit Existing label with covering of an universal scope. The audience & the established Independence of sources give a weight addition to its Non-commercial nature. Bisharch (talk) 02:49, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment : which one of the cited references is an independent verifiable source? Dan arndt (talk) 04:20, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * @ Dan arndt ; Free Music Archive. Bisharch (talk) 05:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * all Free Music Archive states is the exact (word for word) publicity blurb provided by the company and I quote DinuraCreations is a Musical Record Label and Publisher which is devoted for promotion of Sri Lankan folk music. Our goal is to offer a universal access for the people who may want to enjoy and use our traditional music for their own projects and researches free. We would also like to grant them rights to use our publications for educational and even for commercial purposes under a Attribution-NoDerivatives License. (CC BY-ND). absolutely no objectivity and no fact-checking going on there. The article virtually paraphrases this publicity blurb. Dan arndt (talk) 08:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * @ Dan arndt it is answered by someone in the previous AfD. Consider its noncommercial position and the scope. Bisharch (talk) 10:29, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * , information on the Free Music Archive is created by users. The website administrations admit all they do is check the legality of the music content, as to whether they can legally host it. There is clearly no editorial oversight, in that they do not check any other content, all which is either fan based content or sourced from the businesses themselves. That sort of information is not 'independent' of the primary source, which if you read the wording above, comes directly from DinuraCreations. Other editors both at this AfD and the previous AFDs have come to the same conclusion, that there are no independent verifiable sources establishing that this record label is notable. Dan arndt (talk) 00:31, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Reply, most probably the editors who had engaged with the previous AfDs may have a pre-judgment and pre-conclusions. Stating the same thing repeatedly does not support to make consensus but a bunch of words. Contexts are usually subjected to be changed in time. If the subject in its encyclopediac value which obeys the policy clearly reflects the impacts on the communities and is admired by the communities it is notable. This record label gives legally free access for the Sri Lankan Music to the communities world wide. Bisharch (talk) 05:29, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * so where is the independent verifiable coverage that establishes that this record label is indeed notable, as per wikipedia's guidelines and policies, which requires significant third party coverage in multiple reliable sources? I've searched, as have other editors, and haven't found any such sources. As I've stated before this article doesn't even satisfy WP:GNG. Dan arndt (talk) 09:03, 29 August 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.