Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priority Records


 * 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The result was nomination withdrawn. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:59, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Priority Records

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Delete Withdrawn: See comment below Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. It appears to me that this topic is not notable. The key question: Is the topic notable on it own and in its own right - or not. For me, the topic is attempting to acquire notability by association with other notable topics. References are all primary / fail WP:ORGIND. Nearly all claims are unverified. -- HighKing ++ 12:33, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  Jupitus Smart  13:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  Jupitus Smart  13:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The article as nominated was weak, with very poor sourcing and lots of promotional language. But the record label through various incarnations is significant in music history and received a vast amount of press.... --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:57, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, there's more than enough references to establish notability in that lot. The article is weak and stuffed full of promotional language but that can be fixed. I would usually have edited the article myself, hopefully someone else can take some time to do it. -- HighKing ++ 16:32, 4 July 2017 (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.