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. Merge/redirect can be discussed on talk as necessary but there are no arguments here to delete this outright. SoWhy 10:09, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heldeep Records[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Heldeep Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Vanity label owned by DJ Oliver Heldens, mainly used for his own and associated releases. None of the sources discuss the subject significantly. Does not pass WP:CORP. KingAndGod 09:04, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:16, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:16, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:16, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: a nn vanity label. Fails WP:NCORP / WP:PROMO. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:08, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - not a vanity label at all, as it has released material by numerous notable artists who are independent of label's founder. A notable label per NMUSIC #5. However, the article is promotional in nature. The topic is an encyclopedic one of interest to musicologists, discographers, and music historians, but there's really not much in the article (as is) that is of help to these groups. In short, notable topic, unhelpful article except for the discography section. (And I'm torn on the appropriateness of a discography section for an ongoing concern because it is inherently promotional vs. my fervent wish that someone had documented ongoing concerns back in the 1930s, say.) 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:57, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:NMUSIC is not applicable to record labels as it is only for artists, songs and albums. Record labels are companies and their guideline is WP:NCORP which was updated recently with consensus to a more stricter requirement on sources. Releasing material by notable artists is not at all a criterion for establishing notability on Wikipedia. KingAndGod 05:36, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• This is incorrect. What are record labels notable for? Releasing notable music. WikiProject Record labels several years ago moved from under the Business umbrella to the Music umbrella. There is longstanding consensus that NMUSIC#5 is a guideline for record labels, as there is no specific notability guideline developed for record labels, despite repeated attempts. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:14, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• If you're referring to this, there doesn't appear to be consensus as some editors disagreed and few others agreed. I think that discussion should be reposted with RfC to gain consensus on whether record labels can be notable by passing the music guideline or not. I do support the idea of record labels being covered by WP:NMUSIC rather than WP:NCORP. KingAndGod 13:46, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep when I click on the "News" link above I find very substantial coverage in a variety of reliable independent sources. Even if it were not independently notable, a merge to the label's owner would be the appropriate outcome not deletion. FloridaArmy (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• ​ Maybe you could present the substantial coverage of reliable sources here as I tried searching but couldn't find any? KingAndGod 18:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A couple examples include this one and this one. FloridaArmy (talk) 18:37, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

​These sources don't significantly discuss the label. There are just trivial mentions and one line about how the label has "garnered a cadre of success." See more here - WP:ORGCRIT. KingAndGod 18:45, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per FloridaArmy. Kirbanzo (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Oliver Heldens; not independently notable. Fails WP:NCORP / WP:PROMO. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:29, 2 May 2018 (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.