Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Revolution Records

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 merge to Giant Records (Warner). Sam Walton (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revolution Records

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

The subject is non-notable and has been tagged as unsourced since 2009. It is a defunct ~~subsidiary~~ incarnation of Giant Records and has only a one line passing mention in 2-3 industry news articles. It does not require or qualify as a stand alone article and could be included in the Giant Records article should any sources be found. — Keithbob • Talk • 16:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 16:57, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Giant Records. If sufficient sources can be found for the older label and article for it could possibly take this namespace. Artw (talk) 17:24, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep in mind there are about a dozen articles linking to this topic. So whatever the outcome, those will have to be catered for. In case of a redirect, the article name should be mentioned on the target page so that readers understand why they are being redirected. --Midas02 (talk) 05:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge warpozio (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
comment I'm not sure yet. Check google books and news. There was an awful lot of chatter on Billboard between 1996 and 2002 regarding this label. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:52, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
further comment. see [1] It wasn't a subsidiary, Giant Records was renamed Revolution Records in 1996. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:56, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from filing party--Merge is Ok with me too --- My initial reaction was to expand the article but when I saw there was no significant coverage in sources I did a blank and redirect to Giant Records since Revolution Records was already mentioned there (also without sourcing). My blank redirect was reverted so I've brought the issue here for the community to consider. 7826spin is correct that it became Giant Records, so all the more reason to combine these two.
- "In response, Azoff restructured his label, renaming it Revolution Records and bringing in Larry Jacobson to serve as president and handle day-to-day operations." -- Big Head Todd escapes label impasse, August 16, 2002 | Alan Sculley, Post-Tribune correspondent
- "They have added vocalist John Mullins and former Score bassist Phil "X Crace to record "Between the Lines on Revolution Records" -- Area Band Releases New CD, The Charleston Gazette (Charleston, WV), April 2, 2014
The above are the only two sources I can find on High Beam. Also editors should note that the Giant Records article is likewise devoid of any citations.---- — Keithbob • Talk • 22:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

further comment I think Keithbob meant to say Giant became Revolution, not the other way around. It should also be noted that Giant had numerous appearances on the most significant charts, and had multiple signed artists of not only notable but highly significant importance. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Giant_Records_(Warner), as it is the same topic, and the label had significantly more success under the original moniker. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:24, 9 December 2014 (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.