Deletion of Lovitt Records

Comment: Personally, I believe that  and specifically  are the perfect examples of where  has overrun common sense. As far as I am concerned,  should simply now not be used, ever, and we have to evaluate notability of organizations directly based on . However, in this case, the sources given in the article are too weak to support the kind of significant coverage addressing the subject directly and in detail that  requires. The only possible exception is the DCist refhttps://dcist.com/story/11/04/25/three-stars-lovitt-records/. However, that's an interview with the label's producer and we generally consider interviews as not counting towards notability. The other possible source (not currently cited in the article) is the 1998 ''Punk Planet'' piece mentioned by 78.26 above. I found this source onlinehttps://archive.org/details/punk_planet_23/page/n59/mode/2up and it turns out to also be an interview. All the other sources that I could see provide coverage that is either too brief or too indirect or both. I don't think there is a plausible case for passing  here. Regarding the  argument, I am somewhat sympathetic to it (and I don't view the talk-page discussion reference above https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability#Appropriate_SNG_for_record_labels/recording_companies as establishing any sort of consensus on the matter). But until and unless there is a more clear determination of whether and how  may be applicable to music labels, e.g. via an RfC, I think we have to assume that it doesn't, particularly based on  principle. In particular, I really can't see how NMUSIC #5 (a criterion which talks about a band's records being released by a major label) could possibly apply to a record label itself
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:INSTRUCTIONCREEP||WP:ORG||WP:GNG||WP:GNG||WP:GNG||WP:NMUSIC||WP:NMUSIC||WP:NOTINHERITED)