This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Record Labels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of record labels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Record LabelsWikipedia:WikiProject Record LabelsTemplate:WikiProject Record Labelsrecord labels articles
Well, actually that would be 3-6 notable recordings, depending on what you would categorize as "notable". And re: notable "organizations", it's not clear exactly what those guidelines would require for a record label associated with a number of releases by one (1) indisputably notable band (Angry Samoans) and (1) arguably notable artist/critic (Mike Saunders), where if no article exists for the label/organization the reader will see a bunch of redlinks on pages where the label is listed in "Infobox Album"; avoiding this appears to me to be a valid argument for WP:USEFUL, since the alternative might be providing an external link in each article (where WP:SPS would presumably apply). (WP:USEFUL "An argument based on usefulness can be valid if put in context. For example, 'This list brings together related topics in X and is useful for navigating that subject.'")
And as far as WP:N qualifications here... I suppose it depends on how one interprets this: "'Significant coverage' means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material."
Are the following mentions of Bad Trip Records listed in the Google wire service searches "trivial" or not? ??? (From the context provided in these search results... you might get the idea of how these records and the label itself are historically interesting as part of the punk DIY movement, and why the Samoans refused all demo offers--note that the lyrical content STILL shocks many people):
* Philadelphia Inquirer, The : TOM PETTY THRILLS CRITICS AND … $2.95 - Philadelphia Inquirer - NewsBank - Apr 1, 1983 The band's new record "Back From Samoa" (Bad Trip Records) offers the most consistently outrageous lyrics of any recent rock record. ...
* POP EYE Pay-Per-View - Los Angeles Times - ProQuest Archiver - Aug 24, 1980... diatribeGet Off the Air as part of a five song EP on Bad Trip Records The song dismisses the tireless localscene kingmaker asa pathetic male groupie ...
Moreover, it seems to me as if WP:FAILN applies here: "If it is likely that significant coverage in independent sources can be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate unless active effort has been made to find these sources. For articles of unclear notability, deletion should be a last resort." Other coverage exists in printed media, e.g., -"The Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock and Roll: The Definitive History of the Most Important Artists and Their Music" (1992), which cites Bad Trip Records on p. 473 (trivial? I don't know: I don't own it!). Does non-"trivial" WP:RS coverage exist? I don't know; but I'm working on it, and am asking others to look into the matter.
"We're not talking Sun Records here" ... thank you for correcting this popular misconception! -- bonze blayk (talk) 09:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
