Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No More Heroes (record label)

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 delete. Randykitty (talk) 18:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No More Heroes (record label)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

No More Heroes (record label) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable recording company fails to meet WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH, No RS found, trivial coverage in Billboard and Chicago Reader. Not to be confused with No More Heroes (album), No More Heroes (series), No More Heroes (video game). M.Ashraf333 (talk) 06:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a friendly reminder to keep this community civil and to refrain from making retaliatory deletion requests. The sources are clearly not trivial as they are the primary topic mentioned in both the content of the articles and the title of the articles. These are the 2 sources (out of 4 total) that are being questioned.
Chicago Reader - No More Heroes are Building the Future of Hip Hop
Billboard - DCG Brothers Sign to No More Heroes/Atlantic Records, Release ‘House Party’ Video
Officialangrydub (talk) 12:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have evidence that the nomination is retaliatory? Perhaps it's at a talk page elsewhere; if so, then show it. Meanwhile, the nomination does not strike me as un-civil though it is quite vague. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the users Talk page. Officialangrydub (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - There aren't a lot of sources out there, but those that can be found (and which were in the article before the nomination) indicate that the professional music media has seen fit to report on the label, its artists, and an agreement with Atlantic Records. This is an acceptable stub article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Is this topic closed, my apologies for the confusion, but I assumed this response meant this was situated. Officialangrydub (talk) 01:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At the talk pages for the two other people in this debate plus the record company's talk page, I do not see a single thing that is retaliatory or uncivil. It's just a minor disagreement on sources and a little education on how deletion nominations work. This here AfD debate is about the notability of the record company so let's focus on that. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. The sole keep vote doesn't really list sources beyond those in the article, and I'm frankly not able to find sources that meet SIRS that are not listed in the article. A full evaluation of the sources in the article in light of WP:NCORP is below:
ORGCRIT assessment table
Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Secondary? Overall value toward ORGCRIT
Chicago Reader Yes The Chicago Reader seems independent of the record label. Yes Not listed at WP:RSP, WP:NPPSG, nor WP:A/S, but WP:NEWSORG appears to cover this alternative weekly. Yes No More Heroes is the direct subject of the entire article Yes This seems to contain an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, compiling both direct quotes from interviews and giving a history of the organization.
The Hype Magazine No This is an advertising agency that publishes advertisements disguised as news stories. No This is an advertising agency, not a WP:NEWSORG. Yes The advertisement is about them and covers their activities broadly. No Advertisements are primary sources.
Kazi Magazine No Per themselves, Kazi is a promotional blog. No Per themselves, Kazi is a promotional blog. No Per WP:ORGDEPTH, standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage is not significant coverage. Moot as a promotional blog.
Billboard – Billboard is an independent WP:NEWSORG, but WP:NCORP requires that the coverage be independent content to qualify for WP:SIRS. Much of the story is direct quotation of non-independent individuals. Yes Billboard is a well-established WP:NEWSORG. No Three sentences mention No More Heroes: one in passing, one briefly commenting on a music video they produced, and one describing why they chose the DCG brothers. Per WP:ORGDEPTH, significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization. Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements, and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about the organization, and this article is nowhere near that threshold – Majority of the article is direct quotes, though there is some limited summary/synthesis by the author.
The sources I can find online outside of those in the article are New York Weekly (a site run by a PR firm that masquerades as a news website and is on the Wikipedia blacklist) and Clark Street Collective (a self-published blog of a video/photo studio), both of which clearly fail to contribute to notability. Since the sources in the article do not satisfy WP:NCORP, and a search of sources online does not appear to turn up any sources that would contribute to NCORP, it looks like this should be deleted per WP:DEL-REASON#8 as having an article subject who fails to meet the relevant notability criteria. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I'm not seeing enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable, secondary sources to meet WP:GNG.Onel5969 TT me 02:42, 4 February 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/No_More_Heroes_(record_label)&oldid=1137445752"