Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Right Quick Music

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 was delete.--Kubigula (talk) 05:09, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Right Quick Music

Right Quick Music (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I am the owner of Right Quick Music, and we would like to have the article removed as it is no longer accurate. Bigarlo609 (talk) 01:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep. Sounds like an editorial issue to me, not a deletion issue. If there are factual errors, correct them, don't nominate the article for deletion. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 02:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I was about to say the same thing. What is it that is inaccurate? -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 02:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - The nominator's reason is not valid, but the article fails the notability guideline for companies. The primary notability criteria here is coverage in reliable secondary sources. This excludes the label's own website, fleeting mentions in lists of record companies or the like . There is no evidence of any reliable secondary coverage for this record label. Notability could also be conferred via the notability of its signed artists, but the list in the article is also non-notable with the exception of The New Breed whose own article makes no mention of Right Quick Music and states they released the bulk of their music via Thorp Records. The article also includes an element of advertising and conflict of interest, having been created by an account named after the article, then edited by someone who now indicates he is the owner. In short - an unsourced article on a non-notable record label with a non-notable list of artists. Euryalus (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - Euryalus is right, "it is no longer accurate" is a reason to fix an article, not delete it! But this record label has no assertion of notability (I'm pretty sure it's a different The New Breed referred to, since the one with the Wikipedia article disbanded before Right Quick Music was formed) and no independent references, hence, delete. --Stormie (talk) 02:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JERRY talk contribs 20:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not as per nom, but under WP:N. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 20:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable record company. Can't find any good news articles or anything on it. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 21:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per the above. WP:N is the rationale here, as the article could be corrected if an editor felt so inclined. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 23:57, 12 January 2008 (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.