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. MBisanz ^talk 03:01, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

House Afrika Records[edit]

House Afrika Records (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)

Article about a record company that fails WP:CORPDEPTH. My searches only turned up Owen, Threse (26 November 2014). "House Afrika home of SA dance music" – via IOL., which is already included in the article. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:16, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:16, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Notable record company with several notable signed artists. The Therese Owen source is excellent. Also this and this. AusLondonder (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  Notability is not inherited from the artists, and those are nothing more than routine PR pieces. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  Are you suggesting the Therese Owen source is a "routine PR piece"? Do you realise iol.co.za is the internet presence of a number of reliable South African newspapers? AusLondonder (talk) 01:17, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  No, the mediaupdate.co.za and thesetmagazine.co.za ones. Yes, I do know that about IOL. The Owen piece is good. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:33, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The reliable and verifiable sourcing in the article supports the claim of notability. Alansohn (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  How so? The Owen reference is the only reliable source in the article. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:16, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - the company doesn't meet WP:GNG let alone WP:CORPDEPTH. Of the 3 sources provided 2 are unreliable (discogs and itunes), and the 3rd is not independent not enough to establish notability Coverage of a company announcement doesn't establish notability and the company doesn't inherit notability from the artists it signs. Flat Out (talk) 04:23, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Flat Out How can you say that the Independent Online source is not independent? AusLondonder (talk) 08:26, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as I noticed this earlier but held waiting to comment, what's here is simply not what we establish significance in notability with, and without the assured improvements, there's no convincing. SwisterTwister talk 04:35, 13 February 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.