Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reverb 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. ✗plicit 01:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reverb Records

[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)

Record labels are business, not a band, so they're expected to meet WP:NCORP. Verifiability of existence do not clear the hurdle of notability. This is non-notable, because it lacks significant, intellectually independent coverage in multiple reliable sources, of which at least one must be broadly circulated media. Graywalls (talk) 19:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Ireland, and Oregon. Graywalls (talk) 19:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, WP:NCORP, WP:GNG and WP:NOTINHERITED. In terms of NCORP and GNG, and following my own WP:BEFORE, I have added all the sources I could find. All are trivial passing mentions in national newspapers (one single passing mention in The Times (UK)), fleeting mentions in regional newspapers (INM regionals for Sligo and Drogheda) and a word or two in music mags (like Hot Press). As the org is based in Portland, Oregon, I also looked in The Oregonian, finding only this single source. In each case the subject is mentioned, in passing, in articles which are substantively about something else. I can find no in depth coverage to support the text - not to mind supporting a claim to notability. In terms of NOTINHERITED, a small (<10 employee?) independent label doesn't inherit notability from its customers/partners/whatever. No more than any other org/business/subject would. The COI/SPA overtones also do not help. Mine is a "delete" recommendation. Guliolopez (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Guliolopez' analysis. ArcAngel (talk) 01:21, 14 July 2023 (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.