Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dirty Dog Productions
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dirty Dog Productions[edit]
- Dirty Dog Productions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Minimal assertion of importance/significance. --ZhongHan (Email) 01:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 08:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. I'm bemused by the claim that "the label released 2 top 10 singles on Sydney's Underground Charts"; if the charts are 'underground', how are these statistics compiled and why are they publicly released? (and why are the charts underground anyway?) Nick-D (talk) 11:05, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per nom. Even their signed artists are non-notable. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 16:47, 3 October 2010 (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.