Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Familia 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. – czar   16:26, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Familia Records

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A search for reliable sources independent of the subject came up short, the subject fails WP:GNG or WP:CORP Flat Out (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 02:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 02:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 02:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment.  A couple of passing mentions in the L.A. Times:, a possible hit in URB (but only an unhelpful snippet is visible) , and a mention in a Duke University Press book: .  GBooks and GScholar also turned up a few more books that mention this label in discographies of the genre. It's possible that that the label is worthy of note in some context (maybe in an appropriate article about the genre) but in terms of supporting its own article, the online sourcing is sketchy.   --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 01:45, 4 September 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment, Existing sources were for quotes which, as used, were providing substantial content rather than supporting existing content, thus falling afoul of fair use. After pruning those, the only remaining source, that of the ownership of the company, does not appear to be supported by the source given. Crow  Caw  20:30, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for now as my searches found nothing better. SwisterTwister   talk  22:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as searches turned up nothing to show that this meets WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 03:20, 19 September 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.