Slip-n-Slide Records – Restored by the deleting admin as a contested PROD. Nothing else for DRV to do here. NAC. – Tim Song (talk) 01:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
Slip-n-Slide Records (talk`\|`edit`\|`history`\|`logs`\|`links`\|`watch) (restore) Although this label is notable, because of a lack of sources an administrator (unfamiliar with the subject of hip hop music?) deleted it assuming that it failed WP:MUSIC. I wrote a draft of this article from scratch; this label has signed several notable rap artists so it should have an article. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 23:02, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply] Looks like an expired prod so should be restorable immediately on request, so this DRV isn't really needed. One point though, a lack of sources is an entirely appropriate reason to delete, verifiability determines that things should be sourceable. If articles meet the verifiability requirement, then familiarity is a non-issue, in fact if the existance relies solely on familiarity, then original reasearch is likely an issue. --82.7.40.7 (talk) 23:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply] I've restored the article. PROD is meant to be uncontroversial, and upon essentially any request, PROD deletions are reversed so a DRV isn't necessary. Andrew, not sure if you knew, but I was simply deleting the article out of process (going through the list of expiring PRODs), and since the nomination looked reasonable, I deleted it. Regards, JamieS93 00:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

Slip-n-Slide Records – Restored by the deleting admin as a contested PROD. Nothing else for DRV to do here. NAC. – Tim Song (talk) 01:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.

Although this label is notable, because of a lack of sources an administrator (unfamiliar with the subject of hip hop music?) deleted it assuming that it failed WP:MUSIC. I wrote a draft of this article from scratch; this label has signed several notable rap artists so it should have an article. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 23:02, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like an expired prod so should be restorable immediately on request, so this DRV isn't really needed. One point though, a lack of sources is an entirely appropriate reason to delete, verifiability determines that things should be sourceable. If articles meet the verifiability requirement, then familiarity is a non-issue, in fact if the existance relies solely on familiarity, then original reasearch is likely an issue. --82.7.40.7 (talk) 23:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the article. PROD is meant to be uncontroversial, and upon essentially any request, PROD deletions are reversed so a DRV isn't necessary. Andrew, not sure if you knew, but I was simply deleting the article out of process (going through the list of expiring PRODs), and since the nomination looked reasonable, I deleted it. Regards, JamieS93 00:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.