Talk:Spivey Records

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Advertising

The only reference in this article is to the company's web site, which isn't sufficient. See WP:CORP. References which show the notability of the company are required, and listing the company's product catalog is inappropriate. Victoria Spivey seems to be notable, but the notability of the company is questionable. A Google search for "Spivey Records" turns up mostly promotional material, blog entries, and references in articles about Victora Spivey. --John Nagle (talk) 18:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

John Nagle, I fail to understand your animosity against Spivey Records. The company can be compared to Delmark Records and Yazoo Records, small but significant producers of blues recordings. If you look at those 2 Wikipedia entries, they also have links to company websites, and they also have lists of artists. Would you wish to invoke WP:CORP against these Wikipedia entries also, and slap “advertisement” templates on them also? The history of the blues is a history of small recording labels. It is not fair to say a Google search on Spivey Records turns up mostly promotional material. A Google search on Spivey Records also links to discographies of blues artists on this label. Many of the sites listed by a Google search also reproduce 2 false pieces of information: that Spivey Records was the scene of Bob Dylan’s first professional recording session, and that Spivey record’s first album release featured Bob Dylan. (For example, even the Emory University website for the Victoria Spivey Papers says: "After taking a semi-retirement in the 1950s, Spivey returned to performing in the United States and internationally in Europe and in 1962 began her own record company, Spivey Records. She used this company as a vehicle to resurrect older blues artists as well as introduce new artists,including Luther Johnson, Lucille Span, Olive Brown, and the first recording of folk artist Bob Dylan.) [1] It is worth correcting those 2 oft-repeated errors. I have added more references to the article. As a blues enthusiast, and as someone who used to collect Spivey Records, I can vouch the label was a small but significant producer of blues recordings in the 1960s and 1970s. I never purchased any of Spivey’s own recordings, but I liked the label because she recorded the musicians associated with the Muddy Waters Band in unusual permutations. You invoke WP:CORP but that entry does begin “[This] is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." Please see [2] Mick gold (talk) 08:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I have little to add to what Mick gold wrote above, except 1. I hate those notability discussions with people who obviously don't know much about the subject they're talking/writing about (look at John Nagle's contribution page: Never ever contributed anything else concerning blues artists, labels, etc.), and 2. to quote from WP:MUSIC:

"A musician or ensemble (...) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:

(...)

5. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).

(...)"

Seems to me like a perfect definition of notability of record labels: "... a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable": Spivey Records was founded in 1961 and operated until 1985, i.e. almost 25 years of permanent output of record albums of many artists beyond suspicion of not being 'notable' (i.e. Muddy Waters, Otis Spann, Big Joe Williams, Lonnie Johnson, Memphis Slim, and Louis Armstrong). Nuff said ? StefanWirz (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)