Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aulenre

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. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 13:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aulenre

fails WP:MUSIC. Label seems to be akin to vanity presses. ccwaters 17:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, I'm all for it. That's enough reason for me and I'll just keep to the more fimiliar things I guess. --Redkane 10:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
• Well if there's a problem here I would please ask for some reasons that I can agree to the removal of this article or requirements of information, sources and/or references. Also I notice it's just the label you seem to have a problem with and it was my misunderstanding of the actual label that may have caused this afd. --Redkane 16:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redkane, the requirement is at WP:MUSIC. I think Ccwaters is saying that Toonbank Records is not a "major label" or "more important indie label". Cheers, Vectro 06:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, none of the links are Reliable Sources, and we seem to have problems with WP:V as well. The label looks legit to me, but Aulenre is not on their list of groups. Vectro 06:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I was actually referring to the label he originally had listed: [1] (also used as 2nd reference link). Whatever, like you said the new label listed doesn't mention this band at all. And it doesn't look like this band is anywhere near passing any other criteria at WP:MUSIC. ccwaters 13:37, 20 October 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.