Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blacktro

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. CitiCat^♫ 03:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blacktro[edit]

original research, unsourced. appears to be an attempt to publicise the neologism. tomasz. 08:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tomasz, thanks for you critics. I'm curious when this article might be "sourced" because I referred to 6 different sources on the web and there are lot's of parties going on lately that use Blacktro as a new music genre. I'm open for any kind of critique you might have! I hope we can get to an consensus about this. Wilm68 12:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - non-notable neologism. - Snigbrook 16:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

okay, but how could I improve this article to get to an consensus? What exactly is the bottleneck to remove this?Wilm68 17:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the Wikipedia guidelines for reliable sources. The sources don't suggest this is a genre. Snigbrook 18:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the guidelines, I think I refered to not only one but three different kinds of reliable resources. Including: 1) the piece of work that is being cited, 2) the creator of the work (the authors or artists), and 3) the publisher or location where it is to be found. And in fact it is a genre. Said by DJbroadcast senior editor Alfred Bos. He wrote a few articles about the upcomig scene and the first part of the wiki is quoted (with referation to him and the magazine). Please help me improving this article. Thanks for the critique again. Let me know what you think. Wilm68 21:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a neologism with much OR. Roughly 700 GHits, none of which qualify as an independent reliable source. Nuttah68 20:17, 25 October 2007 (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.