Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Ebullition Records - Knowledge

Source 📝

584:
Side question - is the !vote for delete something chosen over and above, say, a merger proposal? You note the existence of McClard's article, but a deletion here makes a redlink, which makes it impossible to connect the bands on the label to each other. I'm not necessarily opposed in general to
510:
article exists, perhaps it's not totally necessary. I don't think anything Chubbles wrote is incorrect; I just didn't find enough sources (through ProQuest, so far). I do disagree with part of Graywalls's argument: hardcore punk culture is, of course, of interest throughout the world.
437:
insofar as that music is of encyclopedic interest. WP:MUSIC suggests a definition of an important indie label, and since this is a musical topic, we should look to guidelines created by musical subject experts to evaluate it. There's no necessary reason why we would use NCORP, nor even a
234:. Just like a lot of corner stores, dry cleaners, small factories and what not that existed for decades that are only notable within the small local community, this is only notable in the niche community and is not sufficiently notable for a wiki article. 663:, which I refer to here perhaps too loosely as "zines", actually had editorial control and weren't SPS in the way Knowledge uses the term. They would be first-call sources for information on music of the sort Ebullition released. 585:
merging label and label-owner articles, though in this case I think the information is better suited to the label article than the man's article (his label and publishing output gets more notice than he himself ever did).
478:
Would you agree that WP:MUSIC (and, by extension, the lede of NCORP) should be modified so that bands and musical ensembles should fall under NCORP, as "a group of more than one person formed together for a purpose"?
195: 529:
My argument is that this business entity is not of adequate general interest, just as local meat repacking plant with local presence isn't even if they process packaging for companies like Tyson and Hormel.
291: 460:
Entirely disagree. Publishers publish books by authors. Galleries exhibit art by artists. Those things too are bound by NCORP/NORG. Record labels is similar. Run your argument past other editors at
506:- Happy to be proven wrong, but don't see a lot of coverage--and I say that as someone who owned a lot of these seven inches and who read the zine. I found this article interesting, but, since a 570:... I just haven't found anything beyond a line here or there. I also agree that it doesn't make sense to apply WP:NCORP to record labels, or to try to divorce them from their artists. 442:
reason to do so, when we have subject-specific guidance - any more than we would use NCORP to evaluate a band (even though, were they not specifically excluded from NCORP, bands would
189: 566:
Right, it was just the database I chose after doing a Google search. I agree that coverage may be mostly in books about punk culture or zines. I remember one book titled
311: 271: 156: 251: 384: 638:, and the "reliably published" requirements for sourcing. while I was quite sure NCORP is the appropriate bar to be met, I checked with others just to be sure. 331: 433:
That completely misses the point of NOTINHERITED. Record labels literally do one thing - they release music by musicians. They are of encyclopedic interest
419:. I looked at NMUSIC again and I'm seeing nothing saying recording companies and record labels should be evaluated according to NMUSIC criteria over NCORP. 103: 88: 690:
If this was "more inportant" for a decade, we would have multiple reliable sources covering it. We need sources, not empty assertions of notability.
627: 129: 124: 133: 390:
by Alan O'Connor gives valuable context about the label's place in 90s-era DIY punk. Our coverage of hardcore is incomplete without it.
116: 210: 177: 83: 76: 17: 411:
you name dropped bands. Association with these bands doesn't cause the company to inherit notability and this is what
372: 97: 93: 230:
as a distribution business/record label. Having notable bands pumped through is not an assumption of notability per
171: 735: 695: 639: 461: 40: 718: 699: 672: 650: 608: 594: 579: 561: 539: 520: 488: 473: 455: 428: 399: 340: 323: 303: 283: 263: 243: 58: 167: 120: 714: 217: 731: 336: 36: 691: 412: 368: 231: 646: 535: 469: 424: 319: 299: 279: 259: 239: 203: 668: 604: 590: 575: 557: 516: 484: 451: 395: 112: 64: 53: 183: 709: 72: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
730:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
548:
a lot there, it would move strongly in Ebullition's favor); 1990s-era punk zines other than
544:
I disagree that ProQuest is the best place to look for sources (though, of course, if there
376: 352: 227: 642: 531: 465: 420: 416: 351:. One of the more important independent labels of the 1990s (in the sense suggested by 315: 295: 275: 255: 235: 664: 635: 617: 600: 586: 571: 553: 512: 480: 447: 391: 622:, why do you believe zines are acceptable sources? I don't believe zines qualify as 623: 507: 655:
If we're talking about basement zine productions, then yes. But publications like
150: 415:
means. An opinion statement of "legendary" by a magazine, doesn't count towards
640:
Wikipedia_talk:Notability#Appropriate_SNG_for_record_labels/recording_companies
599:
Yeah, a merger works--and I always prefer that the BLP be the one "to go."
462:
WT:Notability#Appropriate_SNG_for_record_labels/recording_companies
707:— NCORP is simply not met, there are insufficient coverage in RS. 726:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
292:
list of United States of America-related deletion discussions
359:, maybe the third-most-important indie punk magazine after 630:
description. "For the uninitiated, zines are small-run,
146: 142: 138: 202: 626:, especially not for establishing notability. See 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 738:). No further edits should be made to this page. 330:Note: This discussion has been included in the 310:Note: This discussion has been included in the 290:Note: This discussion has been included in the 270:Note: This discussion has been included in the 250:Note: This discussion has been included in the 312:list of California-related deletion discussions 272:list of Companies-related deletion discussions 252:list of Business-related deletion discussions 216: 8: 104:Help, my article got nominated for deletion! 332:list of Music-related deletion discussions 329: 309: 289: 269: 249: 7: 552:are going to be much better guides. 634:that span genres". So, this fails 383:magazine called them "legendary" ( 367:. This is the label that released 24: 89:Introduction to deletion process 379:'s albums, and others to boot. 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 1: 79:(AfD)? Read these primers! 755: 719:16:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC) 700:20:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC) 673:12:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC) 651:16:36, 11 April 2021 (UTC) 489:11:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC) 474:20:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC) 59:04:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC) 609:22:55, 9 April 2021 (UTC) 595:14:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC) 580:13:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC) 568:Fucked Up and Photocopied 562:11:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC) 540:21:56, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 521:17:22, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 456:11:23, 9 April 2021 (UTC) 446:fall under its purview). 429:22:10, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 400:14:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 341:09:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 324:01:12, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 304:01:12, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 284:01:12, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 264:01:12, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 244:01:12, 8 April 2021 (UTC) 728:Please do not modify it. 355:), and the publisher of 32:Please do not modify it. 77:Articles for deletion 632:self-published works 388:Punk Record Labels 113:Ebullition Records 65:Ebullition Records 692:John Pack Lambert 657:Maximum Rocknroll 361:Maximum RocknRoll 343: 326: 306: 286: 266: 94:Guide to deletion 84:How to contribute 57: 746: 621: 386:), and the book 339: 221: 220: 206: 154: 136: 74: 56: 34: 754: 753: 749: 748: 747: 745: 744: 743: 742: 736:deletion review 615: 377:Reversal of Man 335: 163: 127: 111: 108: 71: 68: 48:The result was 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 752: 750: 741: 740: 722: 721: 702: 684: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 675: 613: 612: 611: 542: 524: 523: 500: 499: 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 493: 492: 491: 444:unquestionably 403: 402: 345: 344: 327: 307: 287: 267: 226:Fails to meet 224: 223: 160: 107: 106: 101: 91: 86: 69: 67: 62: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 751: 739: 737: 733: 729: 724: 723: 720: 716: 712: 711: 706: 703: 701: 697: 693: 689: 686: 685: 674: 670: 666: 662: 658: 654: 653: 652: 648: 644: 641: 637: 633: 629: 625: 619: 614: 610: 606: 602: 598: 597: 596: 592: 588: 583: 582: 581: 577: 573: 569: 565: 564: 563: 559: 555: 551: 547: 543: 541: 537: 533: 528: 527: 526: 525: 522: 518: 514: 509: 505: 502: 501: 490: 486: 482: 477: 476: 475: 471: 467: 463: 459: 458: 457: 453: 449: 445: 441: 436: 432: 431: 430: 426: 422: 418: 414: 413:WP:INHERITORG 410: 407: 406: 405: 404: 401: 397: 393: 389: 385: 382: 381:Ghettoblaster 378: 374: 370: 366: 362: 358: 354: 350: 347: 346: 342: 338: 337:North America 333: 328: 325: 321: 317: 313: 308: 305: 301: 297: 293: 288: 285: 281: 277: 273: 268: 265: 261: 257: 253: 248: 247: 246: 245: 241: 237: 233: 232:WP:INHERITORG 229: 219: 215: 212: 209: 205: 201: 197: 194: 191: 188: 185: 182: 179: 176: 173: 169: 166: 165:Find sources: 161: 158: 152: 148: 144: 140: 135: 131: 126: 122: 118: 114: 110: 109: 105: 102: 99: 95: 92: 90: 87: 85: 82: 81: 80: 78: 73: 66: 63: 61: 60: 55: 54:Seraphimblade 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 727: 725: 710:Celestina007 708: 704: 687: 660: 656: 631: 567: 549: 545: 508:Kent McClard 503: 443: 439: 434: 408: 387: 380: 364: 360: 356: 348: 225: 213: 207: 199: 192: 186: 180: 174: 164: 70: 49: 47: 31: 28: 661:Punk Planet 550:HeartattacK 504:Weak delete 365:Punk Planet 357:HeartattacK 190:free images 732:talk page 643:Graywalls 532:Graywalls 466:Graywalls 421:Graywalls 316:Graywalls 296:Graywalls 276:Graywalls 256:Graywalls 236:Graywalls 37:talk page 734:or in a 665:Chubbles 618:Chubbles 601:Caro7200 587:Chubbles 572:Caro7200 554:Chubbles 513:Caro7200 481:Chubbles 448:Chubbles 392:Chubbles 375:'s, and 353:WP:MUSIC 228:WP:NCORP 157:View log 98:glossary 39:or in a 417:WP:SIRS 409:comment 196:WP refs 184:scholar 130:protect 125:history 75:New to 705:Delete 688:Delete 636:WP:SPS 373:Orchid 168:Google 134:delete 50:delete 624:WP:RS 211:JSTOR 172:books 151:views 143:watch 139:links 16:< 715:talk 696:talk 669:talk 659:and 647:talk 628:this 605:talk 591:talk 576:talk 558:talk 546:were 536:talk 517:talk 485:talk 470:talk 452:talk 440:good 435:only 425:talk 396:talk 371:'s, 369:Fuel 363:and 349:Keep 320:talk 300:talk 280:talk 260:talk 240:talk 204:FENS 178:news 147:logs 121:talk 117:edit 218:TWL 155:– ( 717:) 698:) 671:) 649:) 607:) 593:) 578:) 560:) 538:) 519:) 487:) 472:) 464:. 454:) 427:) 398:) 334:. 322:) 314:. 302:) 294:. 282:) 274:. 262:) 254:. 242:) 198:) 149:| 145:| 141:| 137:| 132:| 128:| 123:| 119:| 52:. 713:( 694:( 667:( 645:( 620:: 616:@ 603:( 589:( 574:( 556:( 534:( 515:( 483:( 468:( 450:( 423:( 394:( 318:( 298:( 278:( 258:( 238:( 222:) 214:· 208:· 200:· 193:· 187:· 181:· 175:· 170:( 162:( 159:) 153:) 115:( 100:) 96:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
Seraphimblade
04:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Ebullition Records

Articles for deletion
How to contribute
Introduction to deletion process
Guide to deletion
glossary
Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
Ebullition Records
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.