Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of post-industrial music genres and related fusion genres

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 Keep. (non-admin closure) -- RyRy5 (talk) 03:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of post-industrial music genres and related fusion genres[edit]

This page goes outside of the existing categorization system for music genres on wikipedia. All subgenres should be given their own article according to the standards defined in the Wiki Music Project, and placed under the category of the parent genre, including an infobox. A lot of the information here is good and relevant, but it should be assimilated into the other articles properly. There is also a consensus problem and a verification problem for nearly the entire article. It is important that when the new genre pages are created, original research is not used.

The following pages may be helpful for those interested in integrating the work here properly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_genres/Guidelines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_genres/Colours http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Electronic_music_genres

This will help in solving some of the conflict here regarding the genres. Before an argument is made for a genre to be noted, or to remove particular artists from an existing genre to a named genre that has no entry, the proposed genre should have a page created using the template, guidelines, and references should be provided. Freqsh0 (talk) 10:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article has some content issues but seems like a valid navigational list according to Wikipedia:LISTS#Navigation --neonwhite user page talk 13:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- My issue is that it is basically a parallel micro-effort to Wiki Project Music, which is meant to do exactly what this page does, but for ALL music genres. The content here, if cited and not original research, would most appropriately be moved over to our existing genre hierarchy on wikipedia. It makes no sense to me to go outside of this and create a new, independent, mini-hierarchy. Does that make sense? Freqsh0 (talk) 22:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article provides some good info, but the consensus issues need to be addressed. As it stands, it seems like a forum for debating and pigeonholing bands, as well as a place for bands to advertise themselves under their chosen genre. The article is quite valid, but needs a lot of cleanup and regulation. Sovex (talk) 15:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- See my comment above. Aside from the noted shortcomings regarding article quality, my main goal here is to conform it to WikiProject Music, because we already have a system in place to accomplish what this page does. Ideally, these will be simply marked as child genres and fusion genres (facilities for this already exist) in our master hierarchy. I am not trying to have the article tossed, or fight your keep votes, I just want to be sure that your keep votes are taking that into consideration :) Perhaps it would have been more appropriate for me to use a merge tag? Freqsh0 (talk) 22:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Change vote to Merge, per Freqsh0's comments. Sovex (talk) 23:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before voting Keep or Delete on this issue, please take a quick look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music#Categories and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Music_by_genre

You will immediately see how music genre trees currently work, and hopefully why this material should (in my opinion) be assimilated into the existing system. In a vacuum, this article is not delete-worthy I agree, but there is important context here, and if one votes without being familiar with the WikiProject Music, they are likely to miss this very important point. The maintenance of this article feels to me like a case of "the right hand doesn;t know what the left hand is doing", so to speak. Freqsh0 (talk) 22:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am really confused by the nominator's rationale here. What does a WikiProject have to do with the merits of any individual article or list? WikiProjects are not policies or guidelines. Why should anything be restricted to a WikiProject page if a legitimate article can be created about it? What's the difference between this list and all the other similar lists? The only problem I see with this is that it needs more references for verifiability; that's cause for improvement and not deletion. Also the name is unnecessarily long. There's really no need for the "and related fusion genres" bit. --Bardin (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm good with this as long as we make new articles for each genre showcased here. 70.72.168.218 (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC) (Stormchaser, not logged in)[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.