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 merge to Lament (band). Before merging, please read through the full AfD to get a feel for how much material should be merged. In any case, leave a redirect behind. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lament Records[edit]

Lament 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)

Not a notable record label. Fails WP:GNG and I'm not sure which notability criteria this would fall under but the only notable band on the label is the one that founded it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. 03:44, 15 May 2019 (UTC) Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:44, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. If the label is not notable, a paragraph or two about it ought to be included in Lament (band) Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:44, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I believe that there could be more sources coming soon, based on an upcoming release. However, if it is absolutely not notable, the page should be again redirected to Lament (band). But I believe that leaving it as a stub for a bit more and allowing users to add onto it would assist in the building of the page. Metalworker14 (Yo) 05:27, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • That would make those releases notable, not the label itself. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:37, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - a bit tricky, since the label was started as a vanity label, but has since evolved beyond that. The label doesn't appear to be notable, as Walter Görlitz points out there's only a single notable act (the founders), and I can't find any in-depth independent coverage on the label. However, if a fan of obscure Christian metal music was to search for the term, they probably aren't looking for information about the band, so a re-direct might not be helpful, unless there was a selective merge. Including the label's discography into the band's article seems like unhelpful clutter. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:55, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I am unable to locate a single reference that meets the criteria for establishing notability as per WP:NCORP. Generally, music labels are not notable in their own right and tend to "inherit" any notability from the acts they've signed. It is a difficult category - some believe labels should fall under WP:MUSIC. Maybe they're right. But until that happens, we look at the articles through NCORP and this article fails the criteria for corporations/organizations/companies/etc. HighKing⁺⁺ 19:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity, where is the official proclamation record labels fall under NCORP and not NMUSIC. I missed the memo. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:57, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NCORP is for organizations (i.e. record labels). WP:MUSIC provides guidelines for the artists, bands, albums, and songs, not the distributors. It is a debate that occurs occasionally at AfD for labels and it usually resolves on those lines. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:10, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not historically, this is a more recent development. For instance, WikiProject Record Labels was moved from under WikiProject Corporations to WikiProject Music. Don't get me wrong, record Labels are funny creatures that pertain to both business and music. It's just important to think about what makes a record company notable: The music (or other art form, but usually music) they release. If they are releasing music by notable bands, they've probably had an impact on culture, and are of interest to musicologists, music historians, and discographers. You are correct in that notability isn't inherited. Say a label is only releasing albums of re-recorded "greatest hits" material by washed-up artists, and has no interest in the musical development of said bands, then I would consider the label non-notable by artistic standards no matter how many notable artists were on the label's roster. Anyway, my intent is certainly not to badger, I appreciate your thoughtful contributions to the topic, it's just that I feel compelled every now and then to demonstrate that notability, or what is worthy of encyclopedic attention, is more complex than some discussions would indicate. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:24, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, a lot of music labels are more than merely distributors and in my opinion, the notability requirements to have 2 independent references of significant coverage, etc, etc, is just too high a bar to meet the criteria for notability for a lot of these organizations. Perhaps some other substitutive criteria comes into play and those discussions and decisions can only really be hammered out at WP:MUSIC. I'm simply applying the minimal criteria for two references as set out in WP:NCORP and it fails on that count (in my opinion). HighKing⁺⁺ 17:43, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Lament (band). It mystifies me that this simple solution to label-started-to-issue-band's-work is almost never considered. Why is it preferable that this be a redlink? Why is it at AfD in the first place? Chubbles (talk) 21:47, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A selective merge and redirect would be fine, but the label has evolved past a vanity label, and now represents several artists in addition to Lament. I'm not convinced the label is notable, and I think your and Eastmain's proposal is better than anything I can come up with. But wouldn't the label's discography on the band's page be confusing to readers? I appreciate the AfD discussion, as opposed to having the page unilaterally redirected, which I believe to be a form of speedy delete without process. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:56, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I too struggled to find obvious refs to support this, but I am far from being an expert in musical sourcing; pinging @Atlantic306: might be able to help? I don't think it would be a problem merging it with the Lament band article, which is not so big. A little awkward, but better than losing this material (via redirect or delete), and clearly it is very connected. Britishfinance (talk) 15:00, 13 June 2019 (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.