- 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 --JForget 01:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Revolver Music (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Org. that fails to establish notability Lugnuts 18:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 04:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh 05:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Non notable. - Rjd0060 (talk) 06:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Neither WP:N nor WP:MUSIC have notability guidelines for labels (which is kind of a shame), but WP:MUSIC does state as a notability guideline for artists: "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)." In the list of artists on the label I see quite a few notable artists: The Stone Roses, UK Subs, Jane's Addiction, etc. I think this is sufficient to establish the label as an important label, and thus a notable label. It absolutely does have to be cleaned-up though. Torc2 (talk) 09:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete seems non-notable to me -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 10:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please expand on your reasoning. - Mgm|(talk) 16:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep It is clearly notable, having signed some of the biggest indie bands in the UK in the late 80's and 90's. scope_creep (talk) 12:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep. They have distribution and they have signed notable bands. That makes the label clearly notable. - Mgm|(talk) 16:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Commment most of the Google searches for "Revolver Music" + "Paul Birch" or "Revolver Music" + "Stone Roses" come back to WP (or mirrors). The only vaguley reliable hit was this page [1] that states RM was formed in 1985, not 1979 as claimed by the current article. Lugnuts (talk) 17:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep There is no reason to delete it. It's also notable. --businessman332211 (talk) 17:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Revolver -> Silvertone is-to Stone Roses :: Sub Pop -> Geffen is-to Nirvana. Needs cleanup, not delete. --- tqbf 19:02, 18 November 2007 (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.