Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ANTI FADE 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. RL0919 (talk) 20:14, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANTI FADE 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)

Same reason as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Popboomerang (2nd nomination) Geschichte (talk) 08:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Consider: the article is a recent creation by an inexperienced (effectively newbie) user. Your nomination reason smacks of Other stuff doesn't exist. I'd suggest greater clarity is required, here, for your reason.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:53, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:33, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:33, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:33, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It's an important record label within Melbourne and Geelong. They've had 80+ releases, have been around 10 years, and their bands get regular press. If anything I'd like to see more Wiki pages about their artists.Jimmyjrg (talk) 12:06, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Their bands getting regular press is irrelevant per WP:NCORP, which entails that the label must have gotten press. Because notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Geschichte (talk) 10:38, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Significance of label, quality of page, and level of media about artists.Tenniscourtisland (talk) 00:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not very impressed/convinced by the boilerplate "as for Popboomerang" rationale, particularly as that nomination reason was that Popboomerang had "very few notable artists", then when it is suggested that this label's roster has significant coverage, notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. I've added a few references and pruned out any connected citations, coverage (of the label as well as its artists) is decent in significant independent publications such as Beat Magazine and NME, and also Forte which has covered the music and entertainment scene in regional Victoria since the mid-1990s. --Canley (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is a reasonable start class article about a notable (although 'alternative') record label with a lengthy publishing track record. Pakoire (talk) 03:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems to be sufficient coverage in reliable sources for notability. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 09:40, 20 December 2021 (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.