Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eulogy 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 keep. Tone 15:27, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eulogy Recordings[edit]

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

Non-notable label, few to no notable acts. Last AFD had no arguments presented really. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability in the article or available via Google. I'm not at all sympathetic with the notion presented in the previous AfD, not grounded in policy in any way, that a label with a few notable artists is automatically notable. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 06:50, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. An important enough label to have an article, and there's enough coverage to satisfy Wikipedia's idea of 'notability' - in addition to the AP ref, there's these: [1], [2], [3]. --Michig (talk) 07:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly a label that's been around for more than a few years with a significant roster of acts, as WP:MUSIC suggests. The already-on-the-page references are just icing on the cake. Chubbles (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As noted above, WP:MUSIC suggests that an "important" independent label is one "with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable". This label, given its age and roster history, appears to meet that threshold. As far as coverage, in addition to the Miami New Times article and the New Times Broward-Palm Beach article, the label is profiled in this issue of Alternative Press. Though I don't have access to the article, the contents' description "Eulogy Recordings braves the hurricane for its Label Profile" would seem to indicate more than a trivial mention. The label also received some coverage in Billboard magazine. Gongshow ^Talk 20:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:56, 27 February 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.