Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1980s retro movement (3rd nomination)


 * 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. --Core desat  07:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

1980s retro movement
God know why this list should be allow to exist as this article seem to have been taken over by this pointless lists, therefore nominated for deletion. Well if this page don't go, then the list must go. This list is rather tedious and retro should be left for other TV shows or whatever. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dr Tobias Funke (talk • contribs).
 * Delete: Now why don't we have a 1918 to 1945 retro movement for Germans, that will make a great article.  Oh yeah, meaning this have bacome another stupid pointless list194.82.139.5 18:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original research, original judgment (as to whether certain trends are really 80s retro or just awful in their own right), no references to reliable sources.  -- Charlene  19:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note prior nominations in 2006: Articles for deletion/1980s retro movement, Articles for deletion/1980s retro movement (second nomination) --Dhartung | Talk 19:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or Rewrite. Is this an article or a list, the list is bigger than the article itself and needs watering down to make it look like an proper article as is isn't a "List of" page. Willirennen 21:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, do not rewrite unless a notable social historian writes a book about it. This is just OR about what some editors perceive as a phenomenon (and the article states much the same.)- Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 23:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * KEEP but CLEAN UP. This is a valid social fad, but the article needs better sourcing in order to remain in Wikipedia.  -- Davidkevin 03:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * See, herein lies the problem. It sure seems like this is a social fad, doesn't it?  I totally agree!  But without sources it can't go anywhere.  I agree that if reliable sources can be found that demonstrates it really is an identifiable fad and doesn't just feel like one, the article can probably stay with heavy cleanup.-- Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 04:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Much of this list have been ongoing through the 1990s, so how can you all this a revival. (different user to above)194.82.139.5 16:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.