Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indie Recordings (2nd nomination)

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:49, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indie Recordings

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No references to attest to notability, that is, there are two dead links, but even if archive copies of these can be retrieved their titles suggest they won't carry much weight for establishing notability. This deficiency should have been cleared up since the first nomination three years ago. meco (talk) 16:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 16:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 16:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 16:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:MUSIC defines "the more important indie labels" as "an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable". (bullet 5). By this guideline, Indie Recordings well passes; it's a somewhat newer label, granted, but it's attracted a large roster of well-known Scandinavian metal acts. Since it's part of a field of labels founded by the same cluster of folks, I could understand a merge of some sort, if someone with expert knowledge in the subject made a claim that they could be considered all of a piece in some way, but the label has enough clout to stand on its own at this point. Chubbles (talk) 23:23, 24 May 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, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 31 May 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, →TSU ^tp* 07:14, 7 June 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.