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 no consensus. WP:NPASR applies. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades ^Godric 05:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Database of Recorded American Music[edit]

Database of Recorded American Music (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No evidence of notability. feminist 16:14, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. feminist 16:15, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. Appears to be the subject of some discussion at the intersection of music studies and library science. There's a fairly brief bit in the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, the American Library Association-published Guide to Developing a Library Music Collection, and similar works. Billboard's article on digital music services for libraries (2010-12-11, p 12), provides only a bare mention of DRAM, but does give a sense of the cost of the service to subscribing libraries. I suspect there's quite a bit more in sources I don't have ready access to. There appears to be a 2003 article about the inception of this database in The Gramophone, for example, and potentially some coverage in scholarly articles in Internet Reference Services Quarterly and Music Reference Services Quarterly (both Taylor and Francis publications). I don't find any silver bullet sources to firmly demonstrate notability, but that's not uncommon for library science resource topics. My opinion from what I can see is that it narrowly clears the bar. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:42, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:51, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as WP:ADVOCACY, with copy such as "....a continually growing, online resource providing on-demand, high-quality streaming media access to nearly 9,000 essential musical works...". And it goes downhill from there. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:55, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as meeting notability standards for a LA topic. Also note that AfD is not WP:CLEANUP for tone issues e.g. advocacy; editors have to do that for ourselves. Newimpartial (talk) 23:02, 27 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.