Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benbecula Records
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was keep. Flowerparty☀ 02:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Benbecula Records
Delete non notable record label, in fact one of its bands was also deleted recently for being non notable. Strothra 16:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - another of the label's acts, Christ. survived a contemporaneous vote; in fact, the result was a speedy keep. What are the guidelines for record labels; there's nothing in WP:MUSIC, is it WP:CORP? Ac@osr 17:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Comment - the article was speedily kept mostly because I withdrew my nomination for deletion mostly because I had meant to put a merge tag on it but didn't. It also updated a major weakness in its sources. The band was not notable because of its label. As for the guidelines for labels; if there's nothing in WP:Music then that doesn't mean you can't still discuss the deletion. --Strothra 20:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- OK, if there are no set criteria, how can one decide whether or not a label is notable? I would say that it would have to go by their artists - Frog Pocket, Reverbaphon and Christ. are all listed at AMG, "Frog Pocket" , a phrase with no other known meaning, has significant GHits, [1], Christ. survived AfD as it was felt notability had been satisfied following a clean-up, Reverbaphon, again with no other known meaning, does well on Google [2] and Greenbank has too many other meanings and usages for a Google search to have value. It is very much a niche label - all artists are Scottish and all create electronic music. In that small pond, they are a well-known big fish. Question is, is that pond too small to ever satisfy notability? On balance, I'm saying Keep. Ac@osr 22:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Fair enough. I take the position that that "pond" is too small to satisfy notability. Of course, there are no guidelines on establishing what that size should be, but Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy and does not require set guidelines on everything to establish notability. I do, however, understand your objections very well. Keep in mind that you may also chose to place an abstain rather than a keep so that you can go on record for a new guideline.--Strothra 21:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
- OK, if there are no set criteria, how can one decide whether or not a label is notable? I would say that it would have to go by their artists - Frog Pocket, Reverbaphon and Christ. are all listed at AMG, "Frog Pocket" , a phrase with no other known meaning, has significant GHits, [1], Christ. survived AfD as it was felt notability had been satisfied following a clean-up, Reverbaphon, again with no other known meaning, does well on Google [2] and Greenbank has too many other meanings and usages for a Google search to have value. It is very much a niche label - all artists are Scottish and all create electronic music. In that small pond, they are a well-known big fish. Question is, is that pond too small to ever satisfy notability? On balance, I'm saying Keep. Ac@osr 22:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - the article was speedily kept mostly because I withdrew my nomination for deletion mostly because I had meant to put a merge tag on it but didn't. It also updated a major weakness in its sources. The band was not notable because of its label. As for the guidelines for labels; if there's nothing in WP:Music then that doesn't mean you can't still discuss the deletion. --Strothra 20:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Keep. It is a notable label with notable artists signed to it. OZLAWYER talk 22:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Keep. Hello, I am Steven and I manage Benbecula Records. I have never posted anything to Wikipedia before and so my apologies for the sudden interest. Obviously this topic is of importance to the label and so here I am. My two cents. Benbecula Records has been running since 1999 and in many respects is one of the longest running electronica / experimental labels in the world, considering the hundreds that have emerged over the last three or four years. I appreciate that Scotland may be viewed as a small pond, with regard to population and land mass, but I feel that is where the smallness ends. Benbecula is a hugely influential label with a dedicated fan base, paid subscribers and with dozens and dozens of positive reviews across the printed and electronic press. The label has gained massive respect from national and worldwide radio, the most prolific being the late great John Peel. Within Scotland, Benbecula is viewed as a massive influence on others who decided to start labels and make music over the last five years. Benbecula is an innovator that easily outperforms its peers via modern music that pushes the envelope and entertains, rather than, in my view, offer self-indulgent, meaningless compositions. Furthermore, Benbecula sets itself apart from many of its peers (which incidentally still have pages on Wikipedia) by offering a discography that has stood the test of time musically. Our artists individually may not be MTV material just yet but as a whole our output is powerful and far reaching. Lastly, I fully respect the regulations that govern Wikipedia, and will not be in the slightest bit put out if the deletion does occur. Wikipedia has done us some great service, as we receive many referrals each month from your site, testament to the fact that people are interested and click to learn more. However I would not be doing my job if the opportunity was not taken. Long live Wikipedia and thanks to all for listening.
Keep. Frog Pocket made an album for Planet Mu, yet he still releases for Benbecula. You're not going to delete Planet Mu; you shouldn't delete Benbecula. I'm Canadian but I've gladly shelled out import charges for the 40 quid Minerals Series (which reciently sold for over 60 pounds on eBay so there's obviously interest) and Christ.'s first album on vinyl (Alias from Anticon appeared on their last EP).Mangle 11:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Comment - thanks for posting Steven; as a Scotsman, I was more than aware of Benbecula's reputation and, as I've noted, on balance, I think the label's position is strong enough to merit a keep. The article needs cleaned up and expanded to bring in more critical appraisal from reputable sources because, on local knowledge, I'm fully aware that what you're saying as regards Benbecula's position is entirely true. What we need is to find it written down somewhere. I also think that Frog Pocket meets WP:MUSIC and I'm going to do an article accordingly, although I may not be able to do this until the weekend. Ac@osr 21:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Ardenn 22:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Keep Hard to tell on this one I would give it the benefit of the doubt. Seems like a real operation hard to judge indie recognition/importance since I am not familiar. I have no doubt about labels like Anticon which are also small but pretty influential and these guys seem to have been around for a few years too.?--Nick Y. 23:03, 25 May 2006 (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.
