- 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 no consensus. LFaraone 23:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Unable 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)
Non-notable independent record label, very little third-party coverage -- BigPimpinBrah (talk) 22:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. czar · · 23:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. czar · · 23:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP: When I first posted this article I didn't include enough sources and third party information about Unable Records. I have since gone back and added several more third party sources, including newspapers and a notable genre-specific music website. It was also my intention to include this article under the WikiProject: Record Labels as a stub. I mistakenly did not do that when I first posted the article. I believe I have corrected that now.Mdransom1627 (talk) 01:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Two good independent sources with significant information about the label. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 15:20, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - It could be WP:TOOSOON for this label. There are independent sources as pointed out above, but only 1 I would consider WP:RS and they ALL fail WP:CORPDEPTH in my opinion. Maybe in the near future when they sign a few more groups and get some more coverage other than regional press from New Jersey. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 18:21, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added another newspaper source to the list of sources. Keep in mind that press attention for record labels is often hard to come by. If a label is doing its job, the focus should be on the bands that are signed to the label and not on the label itself. A label's work is done behind the scenes, but is no less important.Mdransom1627 (talk) 21:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Several more references have since been added.Mdransom1627 (talk) 17:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 21:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
* Comment Notified Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Labels of this discussion. J04n(talk page) 21:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 03:32, 14 May 2013 (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.