Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pooch! Booking & Touring


 * 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. —Tom Morris (talk) 09:24, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Pooch! Booking & Touring

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Note the multitude of tags: no sources verify that this outfit is notable by our standards (GNG or CORP). Even if all the claims in the article are true, booking concerts for a few notable bands does not make for notability. Drmies (talk) 19:03, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 12:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. No claim made that would reasonably constitute notability, and a brief Internet check didn't look promising.--Larry (talk) 20:35, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - I should note that the website's "about" page copies word for word from the Wikipedia article so it makes me suspect whether it's a copy violation. The website is tagged copyright 2013 and this article was this March so I don't know which came first (first red flag). As for Google News, I found absolutely nothing despite using the sole name, "Randy Wolpin", "Roz Lynne" and "Florida company" (second red flag). The problem with talent agents are that they tend to stay in the shadows and don't always get much attention. It seems this may be the case. The Austin Chronicle article doesn't even mention this company. That's a long of clients so it would be a waste of time to search each one individually especially if there isn't even one mention on the company by itself. No prejudice towards a future article if the company becomes notable. SwisterTwister   talk  20:46, 2 October 2013 (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.