Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultimate Recording Company


 * 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, but please provide a reasoned argument for deletion in any future AFDs - Yomangani talk 22:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Ultimate Recording Company
nncomapny--Dsfbs 16:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Delete unless notability can be provided, and the article cleaned up and formatted. As it stands, it is almost unreadable. Johnbrownsbody 16:35, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Nominator's contributions consist solely of AfD nominations.--TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 23:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't delete! Ultimate was a well-known indie label in the UK - and many of the bands on the label were also well-known and sucessful within their genres. How about explaining how Ultimate is not notable! Granted - the article needs work though... NickW 20:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 17:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete this explains why it's not notable. --> So sayeth  M  e  t  h  n  o  r Sayeth back|Other sayethings
 * Merge with Planet Dog. Although this is the parent company, Planet Dog was more successful and left more of a continuing influence - GHits for "Planet Dog" Music here. I remember this label well and own several of its releases but only Senser and Levitation retain cult followings. Ac@osr 20:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * DeleteorMerge No references, no verifiable evidence of notability.Edison 21:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment - hits on Google is a shocking way of assessing the notability of a subject - and relying primarily on the web to verify a subject is similarly shoddy. Not everything of note appears on the web. Verifiable evidence of notability for Ultimate includes numerous physical objects - i.e. vinyl / CD / cassette releases - of successful bands. How is none of this not notable (personal ignorance or lazy research excepted)? NickW 10:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, no indication of meeting WP:CORP. That guideline's criteria do not include the popularity of the company's products. Sandstein 07:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete if they cared about the reader, they wouldn't dump data like that. Ad, for computers (bad ad). Widefox 02:39, 15 October 2006 (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.