Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seraphin Records

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 12:41, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The votes were 8 keep, 3 merge, 1 delete.

Seraphin Records
Not only should it be "seraphim" if anything at all, but the Angel Records homepage (www.angelrecords.com) has no information linking the two such labels. Web search does not find "seraphin" Denni &#9775; 02:47, 2005 Jan 23 (UTC)
 * Right. So try some combination such as "seraphi m angel classical" and you reach such pages as this one. Keep and then speedily rename to "Seraphim". -- Hoary 03:44, 2005 Jan 23 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename, well-known art-music label. Wyss 07:25, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and correct. warpozio 09:08, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Correct to "Seraphim Records". I have no idea what the status is today, but in the fifties and sixties LP era Seraphim was Angel's "bargain" line. The connection between the companies was obvious, the label design was very similar, and IIRC the labels explained that Seraphims were "Angels of the highest order." Most recording companies had similar bargain labels, which in most cases were simply older releases. RCA had two, Victrola and Camden. London had... rats, I can't remember that name, but I loved that label, because at the time London had some of the best recorded sound there was, and their bargain label was just as good, just older releases... Dpbsmith (talk) 23:28, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, bargain bin record label, sorry but still not notable enough for inclusion. Megan1967 01:45, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: But it's not just walkman-dripfeed mood music but rather music for listening to. -- Hoary 09:08, 2005 Jan 24 (UTC)


 * Keep, historically significant record label -- Jmabel | Talk 02:09, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Move to Seraphim Records. Capitalistroadster 08:53, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Redirect as well?  GRider\talk 20:02, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge into Angel Records. There doesn't seem to be enough information for a separate article. JoaoRicardo 04:34, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect Not enough for a full article, but notable on the Angel Records page. Smoddy | &epsilon;&iota;&pi;&epsilon;&tau;&epsilon; 22:25, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect to Angel records. Secretcurse 01:26, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and correct. One article per record label is standard and appropriate. Jgm 01:36, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.