Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artists Against Success

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:39, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Artists Against Success (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Article fails to show notability per WP:Corp guidelines. Was PROD for five days. No updates and no objections. USER:Oo7565 De-Prod and said to take to AfD. Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:19, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• comment prod was only on 2 days not 5 look at article history and because it a labor record company and seems to have produce some notabil artist have used them article should be at least have a afd discussionOo7565 (talk) 04:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: My bad, Prod was for 2 days. Guidelines per WP:Corp state: An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. As this is a music label you can somewhat "reverse" and look at the artists and per WP:Music one of the notability guidlines for a musician sates: an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable. In this case MJ Hibbett seems to be somewhat notable for a novelty song, however he also owns the label and seems to be a weekend warrior when to comes to being a musician. The only other valid blue link that relates to this label is to the Plans & Apologies article. This would not qualify as "an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable." Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —Soundvisions1 (talk) 05:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Very weak keep per reasons by Soundvisions1. Only one Gnews hit.[1] One book at least mentions the label.[2] McWomble (talk) 08:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment:I was not arguing for a keep, I was saying the company is non-notable and they do not meet the criteria for WP:Corp and, if you bring it into music, they have, maybe, one semi-notable artist which also happens to own the label. The "book" you mention is an alphabetized listing of indy record labels by decades. That does not come close to meeting the definition of "Significant coverage" (sources address the subject directly in detail) or other guidlines in the WP:GNG. I am talking about the label - not the artists on the label. I find small mentions of the label in regards to "Artist B has a new single on the label" or listing of releases. And I want to stress again that MJ Hibbett owns this business, so a review of his music or an interview with him about his music will of course mention his business. This label does not meet notability criteria on its own, certainly not of an having "a roster of performers, many of which are notable", and if it were not for the Hibbetts own music there would be almost no articles "Independent of the subject" that mention this business. I think one has to, in this case, apply the same criteria you would for a musician what would be "notable". Articles where the musician talks about a release might only be good to verify there was a release, but not to how notable it was/is. In which case guideline number one of WP:MUSIC#Criteria for musicians and ensembles says a musician may be considered notable if they have been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable. The guidlines for WP:NALBUMS say for a release to be notable it "must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines, with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." As a business Artists Against Success does not meet any of those criteria. Soundvisions1 (talk) 12:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no outside reliable sources. fails WP:CORP Duffbeerforme (talk) 19:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Seems like a non-notable label, fials WP:Copr and WP:musicYobmod (talk) 10:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.