- 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. Article's subject is found to be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ad Noiseam ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No evidence of notability. Λeternus (talk) 18:59, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
- Just my 2 cents : there are tens of Ad Noiseam artists who have their Wikipedia page, and it seems that the whole team finds it "relevant" and "notable", because these pages still exist and no one has talked about deleting them recently. Why would their label be irrelevant or unnotable? I try to understand. 85.171.44.43 ( talk) 10:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ad Noiseam has revealed so many noticeable artists, and has released so many high quality releases (184 today to be exact) that its place is evident here, in an informative site that everyone reads. David. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpolkiujhy ( talk • contribs) 11:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep, just - lots of bluelinked artists, and the fr: version of the article includes third-party press coverage of the label itself -
David Gerard (
talk)
13:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- Just a note, many of the bluelinked artists don't actually link to appropriate articles ("
Wilt", "
Larvae", "
Detritus" "
Needle Sharing" etc.), and of those that do, several appear to have had their own notability contested at some point. –
NuclearDuckie (
talk)
03:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- ahahaha, that could do with fixing. But mostly, that third-party coverage - David Gerard ( talk) 15:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Just a note, many of the bluelinked artists don't actually link to appropriate articles ("
Wilt", "
Larvae", "
Detritus" "
Needle Sharing" etc.), and of those that do, several appear to have had their own notability contested at some point. –
NuclearDuckie (
talk)
03:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: Ad Noiseam has been a notable label for a while, is still releasing great music, and has artists attending big festivals. More label specific articles and interviews could be referenced. -- MilkMiruku ( talk) 22:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. Article's subject is found to be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ad Noiseam ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No evidence of notability. Λeternus (talk) 18:59, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
- Just my 2 cents : there are tens of Ad Noiseam artists who have their Wikipedia page, and it seems that the whole team finds it "relevant" and "notable", because these pages still exist and no one has talked about deleting them recently. Why would their label be irrelevant or unnotable? I try to understand. 85.171.44.43 ( talk) 10:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ad Noiseam has revealed so many noticeable artists, and has released so many high quality releases (184 today to be exact) that its place is evident here, in an informative site that everyone reads. David. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpolkiujhy ( talk • contribs) 11:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep, just - lots of bluelinked artists, and the fr: version of the article includes third-party press coverage of the label itself -
David Gerard (
talk)
13:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- Just a note, many of the bluelinked artists don't actually link to appropriate articles ("
Wilt", "
Larvae", "
Detritus" "
Needle Sharing" etc.), and of those that do, several appear to have had their own notability contested at some point. –
NuclearDuckie (
talk)
03:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- ahahaha, that could do with fixing. But mostly, that third-party coverage - David Gerard ( talk) 15:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Just a note, many of the bluelinked artists don't actually link to appropriate articles ("
Wilt", "
Larvae", "
Detritus" "
Needle Sharing" etc.), and of those that do, several appear to have had their own notability contested at some point. –
NuclearDuckie (
talk)
03:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: Ad Noiseam has been a notable label for a while, is still releasing great music, and has artists attending big festivals. More label specific articles and interviews could be referenced. -- MilkMiruku ( talk) 22:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- 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.