Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Musikvergnuegen


 * 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.  Sandstein  20:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Musikvergnuegen

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

No notability established for this company. The only direct reference given in this article does not even name the company, and therefore cannot be used to establish notability. The other references are overly vague making verification impossible and themselves should be removed. Article history also shows page creation and extensive work performed by Damien Chock who is a member of the company and mentioned in the article. Therefore it cannot be considered NPOV. CrispMuncher (talk) 20:57, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article in Mix at http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_la_grapevine_66/ discusses the company at some length and is sufficient to establish notability. -- Eastmain (talk) 23:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 23:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Concur with Eastmain here - substantial, independent converage exists and is cited, which establishes notability. I see no compelling reason to not follow WP:N in this case. Wily D  10:44, 23 October 2008 (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.