Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EchoVerse Records

EchoVerse Records

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Contested WP:G11. In my view, this could be deleted as being promotional, however, in any case, notability is a huge concern. Some editors believe record labels should pass WP:NCORP whereas others would use WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. My own searches can't find any sources that would qualify for a passing of any of the mentioned guidelines so it clearly should be deleted. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:38, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:38, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A google search also didn't give me any reliable sources (or even just independent sources). The article also doesn't cite anything. Laura240406 (talk) 22:04, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that the user who removed the speedy tag looks like a sock puppet of the article creator.---- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:16, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And article creator and detagger have been blocked for sock puppetry -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unsourced WP:ARTSPAM. per nomination rationale.---- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:19, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - unsourced promotional spam. Limmidy (talk) 21:08, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No SIGCOV in RS. Can't find any reliable sources. Doesn't meet WP:NCORP. No notable musicians signed by this record label. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: Unsourced AI slop, with article creator blocked for socking. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 05:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]