Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reality Check Records, Inc.


 * 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. utcursch | talk 11:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Reality Check Records, Inc.

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-verified sources, Spam?  Pig mandialogue 19:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC) I have no firm convictions about deleting these pages but strong suspicions. Um, I just realized perhaps I should bundle them. I guess this format could be seen as attempting to circumvent the AfD process. Not my intent but I have to go do something else right now. Tell me if this is a wrong approach.  Pig mandialogue 19:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I decided to not bundle these together but these three related pages might note meet notability and verifiability either:
 * Without Warning: Official Reality Check Records Mixtape, Chapter One
 * Realize Reality: Official Reality Check Records Mixtape, Chapter Two
 * A.O.A. (Achieving Our Ambitions): Official Reality Check Records Mixtape, Chapter 3


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bobet 14:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Keep This is a very well written article. The Evil Clown Please review me! 14:44, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree that the article looks good and is fairly well written. However, my concern is because of the lack of third party sources and the very low G-hits for the company and the principle participants. It seemed to me that promotional materials often look good but lack depth or substantiating sources. If I had found enough info/sources to cut it back to a stub, I wouldn't have put it up for AfD. I don't think it comes close to WP:ORG. -- Pig man  17:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, no third party coverage, see WP:CORP, WP:ATT. Sandstein 14:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Very well written article and the company patently exists & is stable to a number of bands. Merge the three Mixtapes into the main article though since the acts on them aren't notable enough to warrant their own entries. -  Irides centi   (talk to me!)  20:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, well-written isn't a reason for inclusion by itself. There are no third party sources in the article, and with a casual googling there aren't even mentions of it outside of directory listings and wikipedia mirrors. It seems no one else besides the founders of this 'record label' has ever heard of it, which isn't that surprising, considering the only thing they claim to have done is released mixtapes on the Internet. - Bobet 07:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Lugnuts 19:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Bobet. There's no evidence at all of notability that I can see.  Mike Christie (talk) 21:08, 28 March 2007 (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.