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 keep. Geschichte (talk) 19:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday Inn Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORGCRIT. NMUSIC does not address record labels. Article makes no claim to notability, single source does not establish notability. Musch of the article is OR. BEFORE showed mentions, but nothing that meets RS SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and in depth. The name was later changed to Klondike Records, but BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV and there is not an article on Klondike Records to redirect/merge.   // Timothy :: talk  20:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  20:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  20:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply I believe the above is a reason for a redirect, not a keep. Notability is not inherited from Sun Records, and the cites above contain nothing that meets RS SIGCOV addressing the topic directly and in-depth, but the article could be reasonably redirected with the information given above. There is no sourced content in the article that could be merged and it is inappropriate to merge unsourced content into another article.   // Timothy :: talk  11:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree, and am rather curious as to what your standards of "in-depth" are. The 1961 Billboard article is seven full news paragraphs about the topic. The 1962 Billboard article is a full paragraph about the topic. The 1980 book has a page devoted to the topic, and the 2017 book has two pages discussing the topic. On top of that GlobalDogProductions (the online legacy discography for 45s) has a complete discography of the label. That is five sources providing significant coverage. How is GNG not met? I never claimed this label inherited notability from Sun Records. The label has a separate and distinct history from Sun Records, and could not be merged into that label. I have explained why this label has drawn interest from collectors and music historians, since there is no SNG for record labels. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:26, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:43, 24 October 2020 (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.