Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UNSA 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   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 03:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

UNSA Records

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable record company. References are to trivial mentions or primary sources. VQuakr (talk) 05:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay the band is licenced, has produced matierial from numerous bands, and have distribution deals in New York, New Jersey, and are growing into new markets. All of this can be evidenced through photographs, and receipts. Their releases were released from a licensed independent label, a label that might not be Roadkill Records, however it has significance. No Clean Singing, a heavy metal review, and heavy metal band archive is a prestiged European metal website, and they only review bands, once again, that are worthwhile, and where it is sourced is relevant, and backs up the albums large distribution that was claimed, because it wasn't just claimed, it's factual. Once again, photo evidence of Unstable albums in music stores, and hundreds of loose copies (which would be unnecessary is they weren't sold on a large scale) can be provided. Also, you might not find anything better because the band is still establishing itself on more national websites that are considered reliable. Job for a Cowboy up and coming didn't have a huge internet presence, but was recognized on wikipedia because they self produced at the age of 16 the EP Doom. The pursuit of a spot on wikipedia is evidence of this, as well as its spot on the websites listed on the page. They list the label, and recognize it on Primary websites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.101.137 (talk) 03:18, 27 January 2011 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Strong delete 7 Ghits, all from Wikipedia. Therefore fails WP:GNG, WP:N, WP:V, and WP:CORP at the very least.    ArcAngel    (talk) ) 07:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks coverage in independent sources. Nothing satisfying WP:CORP. (I'm not sure what part of what Makk is saying above is meant to say UNSA are notable). duffbeerforme (talk) 10:12, 3 February 2011 (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.