Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eartube Empire

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eartube Empire

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

Fails WP:GNG. There appears to be no coverage whatsoever in secondary sources. Rentier (talk) 14:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - nom is not quite correct, I found enough coverage to verify the existence of the label, but that's about it. No indication the label has a history of releasing multiple albums/singles by notable artists. No indication the label has made a cultural impact of any significance. No other indication of notability such as WP:GNG. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:24, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as I'm not finding anything convincingly better. SwisterTwister talk 06:03, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:02, 11 April 2016 (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.