Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junior Boy's Own

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. Tone 19:28, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Junior Boy's Own

[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)

This record label does not appear to meet

WP:CORPDEPTH, per several source searches. Sources found are only providing name checks and passing mentions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:22, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:23, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:23, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:23, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'll agree that there's little in the way of information available online, but Junior Boy's Own is unquestionably one of the key labels to emerge from the UK's acid house scene of the late 80s and early 90s, with many charting singles and albums from notable groups. I'd be very surprised indeed if there weren't articles about the label itself in print versions of various dance magazines like Mixmag and Muzik from the 1990s, before the internet. Could arguably form part of a wider article about the Boy's Own collective that started out as football fans who discovered dance music and put out twelve issues of a fanzine, before going on to found the record label – see here for an overview of the Boy's Own story [1]. Richard3120 (talk) 16:17, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Chemical Brothers & Underworld released albums through this label. Just check the link at [2] warpozio (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep. Has a half-page entry in The Virgin Encyclopedia of Dance Music, which is extracted from The Encyclopedia of Popular Music - inclusion in a print encyclopedia is good enough for inclusion here. --Michig (talk) 20:52, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm not sure there is sufficient agreement for a close but there is certainly grounds for further consideration
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A 1998 Billboard article describes the label as "one of clubland's most revered labels". In addition there is the encyclopedia entry noted by Michig, and a small but substantial amount of coverage in Spin, CMJ, and the Guardian. It appears that CORPDEPTH is indeed met here. IntoThinAir (talk) 21:01, 16 October 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.