Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Displeased 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 KEEP. postdlf (talk) 03:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Displeased Records

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

No indication of meeting notability guidelines at WP:COMPANY. Has had a directory listing added as an external link since prod added. Prod disputed. Google searches show very few hits and nothing to establish notability noq (talk) 13:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Week Keep 186,000 Google hits are enough in my opinion (for indie labels an actually decent result). "Discography" section should be deleted per WP:DIRECTORY, point 4, in my opinion.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 07:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not sure where you are seeing that many google hits. When I search for "Displeased records" it only shows 33,000 in the initial count but that peters out at 603. (showing 100 results/page). noq (talk) 08:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Completely agree with GOP above. Simply using the first source link above returns (for me) 184,000 hits. It is likely that independent, reliable sources may be found. Additionally, the label has several notable bands on their roster. Definitely delete the directory farm. As a note, Noq, is it possible that you have a filter on your search engine? Using a filter would certainly reduce the number of hits returned. Cind.amuse 20:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment remove the -wikipedia from the search and the number of hits is vastly reduced for some reason. noq (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. When using the source link above, the "-wikipedia" term ~~is removed~~ automatically removes sites from the results which reference Wikipedia. I get 184,000 without "Wikipedia" in the results. Curious why they're different though. The only thing I could think of was the use of a filter. Weird. Oh well. Cind.amuse 20:26, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment When I click the source link above it adds the -wikipedia to the search along with the article name in quotes. Google hit counts are a bit screwy anyway, as I said above when I search for "Displeased records" it returns 33,000 but paging through at 100 hits per page runs out of hits after around 600. noq (talk) 20:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Useful source of in-links to articles of bands on the label. Multiple notable bands make a notable label, in my opinion. Carrite (talk) 21:49, 13 March 2011 (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.