Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eulogy Recordings


 * 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. Shi meru  07:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Eulogy Recordings

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested CSD - Fails WP:ORG is promotional as it is just a list of current or past clients. Codf1977 (talk) 19:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep as CSD contester. A list of "current or past clients" - that is, bands signed to the label - is encyclopedic and essential information for a properly robust article about a record label. The label is one that, in terms of WP:MUSIC, has been around for more than a few years and has a significant roster of notable artists. Some of the most successful of those artists are Dashboard Confessional, Set Your Goals (band), New Found Glory, Evergreen Terrace (band), and A Day To Remember. Google News has plenty of hits. Chubbles (talk) 19:47, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * As per WP:ORG :

No inherited notability An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it. If the organization itself did not receive notice, then the organization is not notable. For example, if a notable person buys a restaurant, the restaurant does not "inherit" notability from its owner.


 * So just because a notable band is a client does not make Eulogy Recordings notable. I have been through the first two pages of the GNews hits and the only references to Eulogy Recordings are mearly incidental of the type Band X has signed for Eulogy Recordings or Band Y has signed for Record company Z and wishes all it friends at Eulogy Recordings well. Codf1977 (talk) 10:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There are lots of "Eulogy Recordings signs band X" articles out there - Punk magazines report it almost every time it happens. That's coverage of the label; it states that what the label does is newsworthy enough to report on. So is the releasing of an album on the label. There's coverage of that for Eulogy all the time, in addition to the full-page article published on the label that I found. This is a long-running punk label of clear cultural importance, and thus of encyclopedic worth. Chubbles (talk) 14:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you post a link to the "full-page article published on the label" that you found ? Codf1977 (talk) 14:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's in a magazine, which is available at your local library. Chubbles (talk) 15:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Which one ?, who was the author ? Codf1977 (talk) 15:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The ref's in the article. It's an interview. Chubbles (talk) 15:20, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

well that is probably one source - are there any others as the WP:GNG say multiple. Codf1977 (talk) 15:39, 1 June 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 19:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete: The bands are notable, but the record label isn't. Joe Chill (talk) 20:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep A label that has multiple notable bands is notable. the artists distributed are what makes a publisher of any sort of genre notable.    DGG ( talk ) 02:45, 14 June 2010 (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.