Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Repossession Records (2nd nomination)


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:36, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Repossession Records
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

A sub-stub asserting (without sources) that the company exists. This would probably qualify as an A7 speedy, if it weren't for the previous AfD nomination, which closed as "no consensus" due to a lack of comments. If this is never going to be more than two sentences, there's no need to have it. — Gavia immer (talk) 04:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  --  N / A  0  04:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Didn't find third-party coverage. May need to look into Category:Repossession Records artists to see if all these are being created promotionally. &mdash; Timneu22 · &#32; talk 12:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete- No citations, extremely short stub. Delete per A7. Nilotpal  42  13:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:13, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. Codf1977 (talk) 10:45, 19 June 2010 (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.