Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Cartel (record distributor)

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. The article has been substantially rewritten since nomination. (non-admin closure) Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 20:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Cartel (record distributor)[edit]

Deleted as an expired WP:PROD, restored per request by User:Andy Dingley at my talk page — Aitias // discussion 20:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete Appears to be spun off from the KLF article (it shares some text) - probably better dealt with by that article unless some material dealing with it in a non KLF context can be found. Artw (talk) 20:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hmmm - I can see why it was prodded in the past! The Cartel are notable within the trade and really very little to do with the KLF. They're a trade organisation between some significant indie publishing labels to share the costs of distribution and level things up a little with the bigger labels. The topic deserves an article, but I'd be hard-pressed to justify this as it stands, even as a stub. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, from what I can gather from the KLF references, it is just the distribution arm of a larger record company, something which is not that uncommon from where I'm from. Delete as a non-plausible search term, fails notability per WP:CORP, as there is a lack of reliable sources to allow stand alone notability outside what is already mentioned in The KLF#KLF Communications article. Keep in light of the rewrite that Andy Dingley has done. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 21:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 00:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If I could ask you all to take another look please, there's a new article there. Could still use some work, particularly around the collapse in 1989, but I think it now warrants preservation. Andy Dingley (talk) 03:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. A hugely significant organisation in the history of independent music in the UK.--Michig (talk) 12:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep since Andy Dingley rewrote virtually the entire article it is now well researched, has good sources, and for the most part is written from a neutral point of view. (I moved a further discussion to Talk:The_Cartel_(record_distributor) since it probably belongs there)--Ludasaphire (talk) 21:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep Clearly notable after the rewrite. ukexpat (talk) 03:30, 30 January 2009 (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.