Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jive Records discography


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 18:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Jive Records discography

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No chance of ever being complete, too rap-centric, precedent building against such discography pages. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per precedent: Rap centric, grossly inaccurate, and terminally incomplete. Imperatore (talk) 21:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Jujutacular talkcontribs 21:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Bsay @ CSU  [ π ]  22:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, but limit to those releases actually on the Jive label. I'm not sure why we would want to delete an article because it's "too rap-centric" - this can be expanded to address concerns of inaccuracy or incompleteness. --Michig (talk) 08:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't either understand the "rap-centric" problem. This is a list, or a discography, like any other.--Pink Bull (talk) 22:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Abstain for the moment. If we have Category:Discographies by record label, why should this not be included? Location (talk) 00:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 01:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep but limit to albums released by the label, removing those only distributed by them. Not a rap fan, but I don't see why a rap-focused label shouldn't have its own discography article. McMarcoP (talk) 09:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - not sure why this article is problematic per Location's comment and because I don't understand the rap-centric concern. Rlendog (talk) 20:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep However, this article needs some serious updating and it can done in a such that it can be a good article and list if someone would just have the patience and is willing to take the time to update it. Jeremy (talk) 12:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Will someone please close this debate, it's going on for 14 days now. More than enough time to make a decision. 4 to 3 keep. Jeremy (talk) 10:44, 20 August 2009 (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.