Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harlekijn


 * 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. Michig (talk) 13:22, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Harlekijn

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No source references (>5 years) and notability not established (>½ year). – Editør (talk) 14:06, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    14:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    14:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:05, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect to his article or actually simply delete for now instead as there are unlikely signs of better improvement here. SwisterTwister   talk  06:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I would support redirecting the article to Herman van Veen. – Editør (talk) 23:25, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep In Belgium/Holland this is a notable record label (Herman Van Veen) warpozio (talk) 12:55, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no question Herman van Veen is notable but the relationship with this company is unclear. Is Van Veen the founder or owner or did he publish one or more or all records there? From the Dutch WP article it seems the record label Harlekijn no longer exists, there is only a production company with this name, but this information is unsourced. – Editør (talk) 23:13, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * And even if the relationship was clear, its notability is not automatically inherited from Herman van Veen per WP:INHERITORG. – Editør (talk) 23:21, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - The article is fairly (ok, completely) worthless, but this is an important classical music label, and a search of Google Books etc. turns up reliable information.   78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 14:48, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Can notability be established following the criteria of Notability (organizations and companies)? – Editør (talk) 23:24, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 12:48, 10 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:36, 18 November 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.