Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BSD 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 redirect to Jimmy Cavallo. Consensus to redirect. (non-admin closure) Exemplo347 (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BSD Records

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

Article on a defunct record label has no references. A search finds only incidental references in occasional Billboard lists, with no substantive content to establish anything about the label other than the fact it, at one time, existed. Chetsford (talk) 08:07, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of record labels: A–H. As we have enough for existence but not WP:GNG or WP:CORP. If it actually passes WP:NMUSIC ping me. Widefox; talk 08:49, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as per ~~Chetsford's~~ suggestion ~~above~~below. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 15:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@HighKing: Chetsford did not suggest to redirect it, so "redirect per Chetsford" isn't helpful. Since multiple redirect options have been presented, you should clarify where you'd like to see it redirected. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tavix: Thank you. Redirect to Jimmy Cavallo as per 78.26 and your suggestion below. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 15:53, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch, this one is killing me! 1950s record label! I've done my best to find sources, and from what I've gathered the label issued some extremely obscure but historically important pre-rock music. This is discussed in some detail by knowledgeable collectors on message boards and blogs, which unfortunately don't help with WP:V. I imagine there are some pre-internet record-collecting magazines or rock-music history publications that deal with it, but I've not located them. So with great sadness I have to recommend redirect, but not to List of Record Labels, because only labels with articles are kept there, so such a listing would be removed. Instead, it makes the most sense to redirect to Jimmy Cavallo as it is this artist for whose releases this label has become sought-after by collectors, and which generates the internet chatter. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Jimmy Cavallo per 78.26. It seems the label is discussed more there than the article itself, so that's an amicable way to deal with the situation. FWIW, I would oppose a redirect to List of record labels: A-H. The list of record labels are only for notable labels, and if it's decided here that this label isn't notable, then it should be removed from that list. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I thought that after listing, but the inclusion criteria wasn't forthcoming (there's a redirect to "notable" but that's not obviously the end of it). I'd still prefer to redirect with sources than a whole article. Widefox; talk 02:59, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Widefox: It's better to redirect somewhere our readers can get some information on a subject than somewhere they'd get zero information. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:11, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hobsons choice - a badly sourced BLP or possibly failing list inclusion criteria. Either way, a redirect is right, and retains content. Widefox; talk 04:05, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect changing !vote as per preceding discussion Chetsford (talk) 16:22, 6 June 2017 (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.