Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freshly Squeezed Music


 * 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.  Wifione  Message 16:13, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Freshly Squeezed Music

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article appears to be about a non-notable record label, filled with claims of grandeur, supported by vacuous (phony) sources. The only real contributors are clearly related WP:SPA editors with a strong WP:COI. turns up tons of hits, but almost all promotional with others containing a few passing references related to (routine) coverage of appearances of the bands. I suspect we need to file similar AFDs for the articles about the WP:NN groups signed to the label that these SPAs have been creating. The Dissident Aggressor 01:15, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 06:19, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MrScorch6200  (talk &#124; ctrb) 23:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (state)  @ 16:46, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: At this point, shouldn't this just be closed as Delete with no objections? The Dissident Aggressor 17:06, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable and clearly promotional and lacks reliable sources.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:59, 27 August 2014 (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.