| abstract
| - Unremarkable record label. Article is not supported by any first- of third-party sources. Also, it is written as an advertisement, directly pasted from the label's website. Hahc21 [TALK][CONTRIBS] 16:08, 26 May 2012 (UTC) Well it has a first-party external link. --Hahc21 [TALK][CONTRIBS] 16:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC) Please read WP:BEFORE. The issue at AfD is not whether the article currently has appropriate sources: it's whether appropriate sources actually exist. If you feel the article is a blatant copyright violation, nominate it for speedy deletion. Dricherby (talk) 18:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
* Delete I found no evidence of any notable artists who use this label. Dew Kane (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, →TSU tp* 03:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, →TSU tp* 06:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
* Keep and close no compelling arguement for deletion has been presented, despite constant relisting. Lugnuts (talk) 09:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
|