Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regain 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 Keep as per unanimous positive consensus and the absence of deletion calls outside of the nominator. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Regain Records

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Article was tagged as unreferenced five years ago. It is still unreferenced. Unless adequate sourcing can be provided during the AfD discussion we should delete this. meco (talk) 12:15, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 12:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 12:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:33, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:MUSIC defines "the more important indie labels" as "an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable". (bullet 5). By that standard, Regain's well over the bar - this is a 15-year label with a considerable roster of celebrated Scandinavian metal acts. Of clear cultural importance such as to merit inclusion. Chubbles (talk) 23:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think anyone has questioned the notability, if the information in the article is correct, so the discussion should probably focus on verifiability. /Julle (talk) 13:44, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Is there a specific aspect of the article whose verifiability is in question? Artist rosters for labels are not typically controversial, but if someone is disputing a signing we can look around to source the info. Label artists are trivially easy to verify. If no one is questioning the notability, then AFD is probably the wrong place for this. Chubbles (talk) 02:19, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  →TSU tp* 07:13, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - seem to pass WP:MUSIC.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * please explain how? LibStar (talk) 12:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 21:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep article appears to meet the guidelines for music related articles. My76Strat (talk) 09:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep the labels has released albums for numerous notable bands and is therefore notable itself. Dan arndt (talk) 00:46, 20 June 2012 (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.