Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I.N.F.O. Productions


 * 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 Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I.N.F.O. Productions

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Claims of notability are not referenced in reliable 3rd party sources. Supplied references do not meet guidelines (Discogs and Prodby.org are primary sources and reliability of interview link is not clear). Only contribution by creator of this article and 2 IPs is this article and edits to some albums claiming production credit and removing the prod on this article.

Google news and web searches on the title bring up only primary sources (blogs, twitter, myspace). I'm having trouble finding reliable sources. RadioFan (talk) 11:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following nearly identical article for the same reasons described above:


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  —RadioFan (talk) 11:19, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Some additional references have been added to the article but none cover the subject of this article directly. They mention the subject in passing only.  Still not meeting the requirement of significant coverage in 3rd party sources.--RadioFan (talk) 23:57, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete both - fail to meet the requirements of notability. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  03:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete both. One of the references tried to download a virus on my computer. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 13:33, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not a fair vote. The site could be compromised. Your antivirus might have detected a false positive. Does the site itself satisfy WP:RS? That's what you've got to check. 122.163.204.157 (talk) 18:54, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment its not a vote so that's okay. This is a discussion where we try to come to some concensus on whether the article should be kept or deleted.  To answer your question, no that does not appear to be a reliable source.--RadioFan (talk) 19:08, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry, that was me. Didn't realize I wasn't logged in. Anyway, the point I was trying to make was, just because a site is infected, does not mean that it automatically becomes an unreliable source. Aditya Ex Machina  10:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Actually, it wasn't from my antivirus that I figured there was something wrong with the site. Now the page linked to on the article looked okay, but I wanted to see what the site in question was about. So I clicked "Home" and there was this thing, saying it was scanning my drive for viruses and saying it found tons of viruses... on a nonexistent drive. It offered me a new antivirus software, which I declined, but apparently the site wouldn't take no for an answer. So I'll have none of that.
 * As for the article, I was unable to find reliable sources about the subject at hand. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 00:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I went to the site, and clicked on home (and a bunch of other links to make sure) and I didn't encounter any such notification. Perhaps you encountered a Pop-up ad? They can be rather deceiving at times. Also Google does not identify the site as a distributor of malware, and nor does my antivirus (which checks websites against a blacklist of websites known to be infected). Aditya Ex Machina  18:43, 12 May 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.