Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rockland 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 merge to R. Kelly. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:47, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rockland Records[edit]

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

I don't see this as being notable. Perhaps some part of the falling out between Sparkle and R. Kelly could be merged into one's article or the other's, but as a stand alone article, there simply isn't notability. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:57, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:07, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:07, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:07, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another user claimed on my talk page that the label is notable (under the name "Rock Land Records" because of two platinum albums - Sparkle (Sparkle album) and Life (soundtrack) - but while it's clear that Rock Land is involved in the production of the second one at least, I'm just not seeing sources with non-trivial coverage of Rockland/Rock Land Records. I can't get around the paywall for three articles, but the abstracts make it appear that coverage is on R. Kelly, not Rock Land. Notability is not inherited, and just because the albums or the label's owner are notable does not mean that the record label itself is. That being said, labels seems to be a gap in Wikipedia:Notability (music) that could use addressing. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:14, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"I don't see this as being notable." - Does that mean it fails WP:N, or you can't find any sources for it? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see "Significant coverage" that is "independent" of R. Kelly. It could be that the three articles that mention "Rock Land Records" but are behind paywalls would push this over the "Significant coverage" line, but going by the abstracts of those articles, which focus on R. Kelly and not on the label, I would have to say that based on the sources I could find, "Significant coverage", and therefore the GNG, isn't met. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:42, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with R. Kelly, but with all the fluff unrelated to the label removed. I've thought a lot about this, much more time than it deserves undoubtedly. My initial inclination is to keep, as the article might qualify for "mid-importance" on WikiProject Record Labels, because of chart success. It is more than a vanity label, as there are signed artists other than Kelly, so this might be viewed as no more of a vanity label than Madonna's Maverick Records. However, I can't find that the label has actual back-office personnell a real record label would have, it seems to be just a brand attached to R. Kelly productions. All issues are distributed/marketed by other established "major" labels. If evidence/sources present themselves in the future, then this article can be re-created easily enough, there's so little here truly worth keeping. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 14:34, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 05:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Selective merge to R. Kelly, per WP:NCORP. -- Trevj (talk) 11:44, 1 October 2013 (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.