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. (non-admin closure) →TSU ^tp* 07:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jazzland Recordings

[edit]

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

Article is unreferenced. The subject is claimed to be a subsidiary of Universal Music Group, and a lot of possibly notable artists are listed in the article. However, with no references, these remain unsubstantiated claims. meco (talk) 22:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 22:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 22:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 22:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

* WP:JAZZ notified. AllyD (talk) 16:01, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've added a first reference, to an article from Billboard, so the basic article is now substantiated. That leaves the matter of notability, on which I'll seek/post more later. AllyD (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone checking on Jazzland Recordings, it is important to note that previous labels of a similar name can give false positives. AllyD (talk) 19:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A couple of snippet view articles provide claims of notability: "It is at the vanguard of some of the most creative jazz in the world right now and in the middle of that is Jazzland Records" (snippet view from Tribune) "Jazzland has become an important outlet and catalyst of Nu Jazz" (snippet view from the Penguin guide to jazz recordings). AllyD (talk) 19:47, 25 May 2012 (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) 00:01, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep UMG subsidiary with substantial roster; of cultural significance such as to merit an article. Chubbles (talk) 02:08, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Subject meets notability guidelines. Credible claims of importance are supported in reliable sources. WP:BEFORE (D1 and D3) suggest this article should not have been nominated. All improvements, which the article does require, are aspects of normal editing. In the interest of propriety I call on the nominator to withdraw this nomination. My76Strat (talk) 02:13, 3 June 2012 (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.