Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unfun 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. --Coredesat 01:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfun Records

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable record label. Page created by IP and some of the bands on the label were created by User:Unfun. Sure, some of the bands once on the label have gone on to better things on bigger labels, but Unfun is not notable by association. Furthermore, there are no references that could verify that those bands are even on the label. The article is spammy and another band on the label was deleted earlier for being non-notable (see Articles_for_deletion/Animal (band) for details). Fails WP:MUSIC. Rockstar ( T/C ) 07:06, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 
 * Delete, verifiability in question, not to mention notabilty. Stifle (talk) 20:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * &emsp; Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  &emsp; Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fuhghettaboutit 22:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to add my signature earlier, so I'll add it now.--queso man 20:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, because verifiability is iffy, and the label seems to be non-notable.
 * Weak Keep: I am not very familiar with the hardcore/punk scene.  However, given what I know from a class about rock and roll and culture I took at university, it seems small independent labels play a very important role.  As such, this article has some argument for staying. Fixer1234 02:38, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. In order for the article to stay on Wikipedia, it must fulfill WP:N, or, more precicely, WP:MUSIC or WP:CORP. Rockstar ( T/C ) 03:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I found at least one article from a newspaper about the label link. Music from the label is available for download from Walmart--this ought to say something about interest in music from the band. You yourself noted that this label has had bands go on to more prominent labels, and that too would seem to indicate this label is an important part of the music scene to which it belongs. *Perhaps we could look into merging various, semi-notable indie record lables into one article? Fixer1234 05:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete notability Iosef U T C  03:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - no sources provided, and hunting around shows them being mentioned, but no reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq 16:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete:, fails WP:V, WP:MUSIC. While no doubt small indie labels generally play an important role in rock and roll culture, Wikipedia verification policies make surprisingly little mention of said culture as grounds for exemption from them.  So far this label fails WP:MUSIC with flying colors, and there are no sources whatsoever, nor grounds to back up any premise of the label's notability other than wishful "well, they might be"s.    RGTraynor  19:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above-cited notability issues. If they expand their label significantly, or get more significant note from sources other than content availability (e.g. online music vendors) then it should be re-opened for consideration. Until then, it fails WP:MUSIC in my estimation. Lemonsawdust 21:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of sources to establish notability.-- danntm T C 22:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no exception made for this or any other culture.  Jody B 23:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable enough. Acalamari 00:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep source provided and Underground labels are a major force in hardcore. Could fall under WP:ROCK posted message on project page.-- St.daniel talk 12:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: (a) which source would that be? (b) if it is a "major force," evidence of that must be provided; and (c) What official policy or guideline does WP:ROCK encompass?    RGTraynor  13:10, 20 April 2007 (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.