Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bubblegum dance

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bubblegum dance[edit]

[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)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Seems like it should be a speedy delete or at best redirected to Eurodance. ili (talk) 23:00, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As best as I can tell, this is a fan movement; they have a fandom wiki and have planted the same description just about everywhere that user-generated content is allowed, from Last .fm to urban dictionary to reddit, as well as on their own "free information encyclopedia" on bubblegumdancer.com. I can find no evidence that this term exists outside of its fandom, and it has no notability. (Even the article begins with an explanation that this new term is being applied retroactively to older music that was never called this "subgenre".) Possible candidate for a CSD A11, but since we're here... Schazjmd (talk) 23:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. I was unable to find really anything besides the fandom page mentioned above and some Spotify/YouTube playlists. WhinyTheYounger (talk) 20:17, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions. Schazjmd (talk) 20:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I do not know if this is an "official" term, but the article is definitely describing an existing and distinguished music genre.--Clicklander (talk) 14:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Clicklander, what reliable sources do you cite for that claim? Schazjmd (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I do not have any source. I am just saying that the article describes a genre that exists. There is a set of songs that have some common characteristics and this is exactly what this article describes.--Clicklander (talk) 18:12, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OUTCOMES and WP:SIGCOV. Since at least 2007, we have been merciless in deleting articles about marginal musical genres. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electrocrunk, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chelpedo punk, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tech Beat, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian fantasy metal, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative bubblegum pop, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian post-hardcore. I don't know of any other such strong consensus outside of official policy. I note that there is a lack of significant coverage for this term, as did the nomination. Bearian (talk) 00:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC) P.S. see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slow grass. Bearian (talk) 00:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable term. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 12:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There are a couple of mentions in wp:rs about the Genere bubblegum like this [1], [2], [3] so I am a bit confused weather to endorse these refs or not, I would prefer my fellow editors to decide about the reference mentions. Dtt1^Talk 12:55, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dtt1, there is already an article about Bubblegum music. This is about a supposed subgenre called Bubblegum dance. Schazjmd (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is nothing out there that could support the inclusion of this subject in Wikipedia. It's a text constructed by its authors. Claiming that it's a good subject for inclusion without substantion of the claim is unacceptable. Saying that "it's well known" or that "it exists" are also geting us nowhere. We need verification but the sources for this do not exist. The reason is that the subject is not notable enough for an article. -The Gnome (talk) 16:05, 11 July 2020 (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.