Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wah Wah 45s

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wah Wah 45s

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional article fails WP:CORPDEPTH Logical Cowboy (talk) 03:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete They were and are very important in the london jazz scene. We can find references on BBC [1] and many other minor radio stations. Obviously is a jazz oriented indie label, so they are not BMG. But i guess the article covers the subject well enough. Of course there is allways room for improvement. Elandroid (talk) 09:01, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 13:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 23:02, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because of lack of thorough coverage from sources. Reference 1 expresses one guy's approval, and isn't really the subject. Reference 2 is an obituary recognizing things important to the person, but not necessarily notable. Reference 3 announces regular notices like EP releases. Reference 4 is a passing mention. Reference 6 also focuses primarily on regular notices, like who is hosting sessions and who has joined, however, I couldn't find any mention on reference 5. --Mysterytrey 01:05, 16 March 2014 (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.