Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tempa


 * 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 Dubstep.  MBisanz  talk 03:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Tempa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Except for a mention on www.residentadvisor.net, I was unable to find any coverage of this obscure company. The Dissident Aggressor 20:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Dubstep. It is only visible in the context of dubstep and what there is about it is fully covered in that article. This article "Tempa" has been around since 28 July 2006, so there is no question about adequate time. The discography is not verifiable, nor does it contribute more than the text does at Dubstep. --Bejnar (talk) 21:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Pishcal  — ♣ 22:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Pishcal  — ♣ 22:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - minimal reference does not support notability.--Rpclod (talk) 04:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Multiple searches found nothing aside from Books (not much) and this is simply another case of a record label with little to no attention to establish notability. SwisterTwister   talk  05:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Label is cited by multiple references (I added one) indicating the label was highly important to the creation of an entire genre of dance music. As such, it is notable, or as WP:N says, "worthy of notice".  By length of operation (at least 11 years) and number of notable artists signed (currently 7 with articles, and most certainly not a walled garden as often seen with truly non-notable labels) this label is clearly also "one of the more important indie labels" as defined by WP:MUSICBIO #5.    78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 13:51, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete I looked for references in addition to the ones provided and couldn't find anything to support notability. A brief mention in the book is not significant coverage. It should be used as a reference in the dubstep article to to support the subject's inclusion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:47, 16 May 2015 (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.