Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regency Home Entertainment


 * 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   redirect to Regency Media Group. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Regency Home Entertainment

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This page fails WP: CORP as it has received no significant coverage by 3rd party reliable sources. It also fails WP: GNG as the only source listed is its website. I have done WP: BEFORE and performed a google search of Regency Home Entertainment and have found no reliable coverage in 3rd party sources. Electric Catfish 23:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. If notability could be proven for Regency Media Group, this might serve as a redirect for that article. First I think I'd have to prove notability for the other article... (sighs)Tokyogirl79 (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm seeing nothing apart from advertising, press releases, and their own web pages, searching for "Regency Home Entertaiment". I found one story on Regency Media but that's not enough to be notable. I'm a little surprised the company has so little coverage, as film distribution normally attracts some interest from film/media news sources, so maybe other search terms will give some more. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Regency Media Group and improve THAT article, as at least the redirect target seems to have greater sourcability. Using "Regency Media, Australia" as a search term I found a bit more than did Colapeninsula.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Electric Catfish 12:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:04, 2 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Regency Media Group; there does not appear to be a strong enough sourceability for a stand-alone article. Zaldax (talk) 18:02, 2 August 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.