Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Repossession 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   no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough participation to determine consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Repossession Records

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I can't find significant coverage for this record label. Joe Chill (talk) 01:37, 9 October 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- Joe Chill (talk) 01:50, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- Joe Chill (talk) 01:50, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment.  I found references in some of these articles (there are more behind pay/subscription walls), but I'll leave it to others to determine whether they are reliable sources/more than trivial.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.