Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BinaryStar Music (2nd nomination)

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. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BinaryStar Music

Despite web and news search unable to find any material coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Tagged for notability for five months—really ought to have been enough time to generate refs. Bongo matic 05:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reopened article was deleted after discussion in 2006, 3 years after this a WP:CSD#G4 is too long a bow to draw, alternative would have been to send to DRV but this discussion basically serves the same purpose and can achieve the same results Gnan garra 13:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:SPEEDY#A9. It shows no proof of notoriety. Very straight forward here. OlYeller^Talktome 10:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment A9 does not apply as the article is about the record label not a recording.Dpmuk (talk) 14:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't find any evedience of notability using google or google news. Dpmuk (talk) 14:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No reliable sources... and especially because I've noticed that articles about obscure record companies are being used as claims of notability for even more obscure artists, and it's actually working. §FreeRangeFrog 19:31, 19 February 2009 (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.