Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belock Recording Studio

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 delete. Technically, redirect was preferred but since there is no agreement on whether Harry D. Belock or Everest Records are the better redirect target, I am going for delete - I believe this is the normal solution for disagreeing redirect opinions, if this isn't true please contest on my talk page. Anyone may create the redirect afterwards as a normal editorial action. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:25, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will rewrite the Everest Records article which is incomplete and inaccurate and include my Belock Recording Studio in it with all the citations that I have on file at a later stage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarlingDavid (talk • contribs) 19:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Belock Recording Studio

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

Undocumented essay. Unless sources can be produced, this should be pared back and merged with Everest Records, which already has a history section. ubiquity (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: creator took great offense at tags which asserted (correctly) that the article had no references. See the talk page for details. ubiquity (talk) 16:23, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:36, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:36, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:36, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Harry Belock. There's a few hits on the studio, but as an aside in an article in Billboard here: [1] or as a comment where an album was created. This may be better served as a redirect to Harry Belock himself. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:35, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Harry Belock is a good solution. While the studio existed and had music recorded there, I could not locate any 3rd party sources on it, except for this Billboard mention. Everest Records is another redirect option. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to HB is fine with me (nom). ubiquity (talk) 01:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On further reflection, Everest Records may be a better target, as I was able find this snippet: "Everest records are the product of Belock Recording, a division of the Belock Instrument Corporation. If the two discs considered here are an accurate indication of the sound quality to be had from Everest stereo discs in general, a new name..." (from The New Records, 1959). The two entities are connected, and Belock is mentioned in the Everest article. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:51, 18 August 2016 (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.