Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triple X 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 keep. (non-admin closure) — MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Triple X Records

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is one posted source, and it is a wiki. The article contains just a few sentences. Kellymoat (talk) 04:18, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep This label was an important issuer of California punk, alternative, and hip-hop from the mid-1980s well into the 1990s. The page's list of noteworthy artists is extensive (and incomplete); the label clearly hurdles WP:MUSIC's definition of "one of the more important indie labels", as a label that was around for more than a few years and had a significant roster of artists. The label gets a large number of hits in Google Books for mentions in trade publications such as Billboard and CMJ. A retrospective compilation released by the label was even reviewed by CMJ . Chubbles (talk) 06:37, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 07:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep really per Chubbles above. Keep on two counts: Notable record label per significant roster of notable artists, almost certainly meets GNG per Google Books search, I did not search newspapers, academic journals, or reliable online sources such as AllMusic.    78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 16:27, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep without a doubt. As a stub, there is not much there. I was able to find (and boldly add) a couple of good sources easily. There's more out there, particularly in Billboard. This article can definitely be improved and brought up to standards. That's what should happen, rather than deleting it. Missjastersgarden (talk) 01:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Significant label. No good reason has been put forward for deletion. --Michig (talk) 08:28, 27 December 2016 (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.