Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nitto Records
- 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. clearly not a serious request for deletion. Possibly could have gone to DRV but we have a consensus now
]Nitto Records
- Nitto Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I do not believe this article should be deleted, however it should not have been speedied without discussion. This was speedied without discussion or attempts to salvage. It is not originally my article, but one I stumbled across two weeks ago in my research, actually filled a gap. That it's been here several years, and has a Japanese Wikipedia article, means it doesn't qualify to have been speedied. Historic recording and publishing companies are inherently notable, it just needs better sourcing. Listing here so that discussion as to notability among the community can be held. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. As per above rationale. It now has two references - more than enough for a 3-line article.--Technopat (talk) 06:59, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - At the moment fails ]
- Based on the most recent discussion on your talkpage, it seems you are none too careful about what you speedy, and have made several recent errors. My earlier accusation now turns to bad faith on your part, as there are clearly several steps you should have taken aforehand. Instead of trying to justify your scorched-earth methods here, why don't you dial it back a bit.--Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Fine. It may not have had any references then, but it does now. Any other reason for deleting? We all know about notability etc. guidelines here at Wikipedia. What about common sense? This is not an article created by an anonymous user raving about his/her pet "garage band" as someone put it, which is one typical criterion for speedy delete. It is an article created in 2003 by an experienced editor who contributes much knowledge on music-related articles at Wikipedia, and should not have been deleted without discussion, etc. as per Kintetsubuffalo above, if only out of courtesy to another editor and good faith.--Technopat (talk) 08:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Maybe we need to find someone who can translate the Japanese article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Warpozio (talk • contribs)
- Keep Now article has been expanded and ref'd. Great work! Lugnuts (talk) 12:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep of course. Infrogmation (talk) 13:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Still needs some attention, but seems to satisfy the basic notability criteria now that it has been sourced. --DAJF (talk) 14:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per the sources found. ···Join WikiProject Japan! 14:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep notable record label, now that it has been expanded and sourced it's clearer why. ]
- Speedy close - Wrong venue, this should have been taken up at DRV. yak 19:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{yak 19:29, 9 July 2010 (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.