- 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) —Theopolisme 00:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Loaded Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A topic about a record label that fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Searches are only yielding passing mentions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:42, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 18:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 18:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. It has an entry in the Encylopedia of Popular Music. If it's good enough for a well-regarded print encyclopedia, it's good enough for Wikipedia. --Michig (talk) 19:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theopolisme 15:53, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep Very notable. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:29, 23 November 2012 (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.