Talk:Matador Records

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Labels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of record labels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Record LabelsWikipedia:WikiProject Record LabelsTemplate:WikiProject Record Labelsrecord labels articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Alternative music Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080407045555/http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/label_profile/matador-records.htm

Untitled

Did Void really record for Matador? They are on the list here, but they were primarily a Dischord band, and Matador never released any stuff by hardcore punk bands to my knowledge. Chris77xyz 20:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Matador is still listed on the RIAA's site as of 01/10/06.

Matador is also Lloyd "Matador" Daleys reggae recording label.

Merge with list of artists

Agree seems a sensible suggestion Ollie 02:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree RayGates 17:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merged, as no opposition in three weeks of listing. Ollie 18:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No more mention of Pavement?

The question "No more mention of Pavement?" appeared in the article. It doesnt belong there, so i've put it here instead. I don't really know what it's refering to, so i can't help, but perhaps someone else can!

== == [[ every band listed should have an article]] == ==

Fair use rationale for Image:Matador.gif

Image:Matador.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roster

I suggest changing this section name to Acts, and the "Current (active) Bands" to simply "Current", and the "Alumni (Former Bands)" to simply "Former". Even if people disagree to those overall changes, I'd still suggest removing (active) from "Current (active) Bands" as it is redundant, and changing "Alumni (Former Bands)" to Former Bands as a record label doesn't have Alumni per the definition given in Alumnus.IrishStephen (talk) 23:55, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discography

Since many other pages regarding record labels (even indie ones) have a close-to-complete discography, I believe it should be a priority on this page. Any help converting the "notable artists" section to "discography" in table format would be kindly appreciated. Finalius (gibberings) 18:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC) [reply]

On second thought, I would like to know why there is a link to the discography, but it is not listed here. Is this relevant? Finalius (gibberings) 18:50, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Status

Matador is distributed by ADA in the United States. ADA is owned by Warner. Does that affect its status as being independent? AmericanLeMans (talk) 22:35, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Matador Records. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151005114625/http://www.matadorrecords.com/bands to http://www.matadorrecords.com/bands

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:58, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Censorship controversy"

Twice now I have tried to remove an improperly sourced section that claims "Matador has come under fire for censoring albums", and HotRodHundley (talk · contribs) has twice reverted me (incorrectly claiming I'm vandalizing and incorrectly trying to "warn" me by copying text from their own talk page warnings to my user page, but whatever). Plain an simple, just becuase an artist claimed something happened on a Reddit AMA doesn't make it a either true nor a "controversy". We need independent reliable sources making this assertion, not a self-published comment by an aggreived party. This section should be removed unless properly sourced, but I don't want to trigger 3RR. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 13:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree. I couldn't find any reliable sources reporting on the matter so I've removed the section from the article. GentleHillRacer (talk) 02:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]