Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/306 Records

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. RL0919 (talk) 10:35, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

306 Records[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Sources consist of:

deadlinks to the company's website
deadlinks to press releases by the company or by related companies
deadlinks to articles about affiliated artists or companies, that sometimes mention 306 Records in passing but are not specifically about 306 Records

Now, yes, deadlinks are not a reason for deletion in themselves ^{(I'm normally the first to praise the Wayback Machine)}, but in this case it sort of indicates that even the people the company has to pay to talk about related acts and companies don't care enough to keep the pages up.

In other words, fails WP:GNG. Also, this make me think that nominating the article for deletion would be a fun idea. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:58, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now, yes, this exists. That's a source. Needs to be at least two more like that (i.e. reliable, independent, but specifically about the company) to demonstrate notability. This, for example, only mentions 306 in passing. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. fails GNG. who says that editing wikipedia isn't amusing? -Roxy, the dog. wooF 10:41, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Probably whoever made this edit. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What a mess. The current version of the article says that it was founded by Jared Land and is based in Saskatoon. The version preferred by 142.165.170.92, who claims to be Jared Land, says that it was founded by Jared Land and is based in Prince Albert. Thinking that 142 may have a reasonable point here, I tried to check with a Google search – and found this Facebook page, which claims it was founded by Louis O'Reilly. Maproom (talk) 20:54, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The label has had a few releases but they're mostly independent obscure country music acts. Most of the acts, and the label itself, seem to have had their pages created by Eric444 (talk · contribs), a now-retired editor who used to deal in Canadian country music. As these acts have fallen into obscurity, their albums went without being reviewed and their singles only barely charted. Therefore, the label is probably not notable, and the artists only marginally so. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:39, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I started marking the dead links, and then realizing most of them were dead or archived, started to look for some coverage outside of the article. I found this: [[1]] and [[2]]. Not enough. So without reliable coverage, fails WP:GNG TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 01:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't look like it passes WP:N to me. No significant awards or coverage. I wouldn't block the page from being recreated though. It could theoretically pass notability in future. Jwslubbock (talk) 12:47, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jwslubbock: It's had its chances already. Several of the artists who've recorded for the label are unquestionably notable, but almost none of the albums seem to have gotten any semblance of attention. Artists and albums can still be notable if the label isn't. Most of the artists in this case seem to pass WP:NMUSIC but that does not transfer notability to the label. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:42, 17 October 2019 (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.