Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helter Skelter (rave music promoter)

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 Editors may trim-out promotional spam as they see fit. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 16:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helter Skelter (rave music promoter)

This company seems to fail WP:CORP. No evidence of notability is given, no sources have been added in over 2 years, the text seems promotional. CSD in 2005 and PROD in 2008 were contested however. B. Wolterding (talk) 15:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. From my limited experience in the rave scene I have definitely seen the name Helter Skelter many times. It certainly seems to me that it is in fact a notable organisation and that sources probably do exist to demonstrate this, but I haven't been able to find any. ~ mazca ^talk 16:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stubify Has many releases [1][2][3] and [4] review by Ministry of Sound i'm pretty sure i recall at least the last one of those charting so i dont doubt it's notability but the article has seriosuly neutrality issues so i suggest it is stubbed to a basic description. There are some sources with unknown reliability [5]. --neonwhite user page talk 23:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stubify per Neon white. Atyndall93 | talk 11:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stubify - since I first looked at this article two and a half years ago, very little has been done with it. I think there's a degree of notability, but not much. It certainly needs all the promo material chopping out.Bedesboy (talk) 22:33, 21 April 2008 (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.