Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crust punk


 * 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 all. @pple 17:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Crust punk

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I realize that this was previously nominated for deletion years ago, but that debate seemed to focus on whether the genre actually exists. I can say with confidence that "crust punk" exists in the mind of its fans, but I see no indication that the genre is notable or that its Wikipedia article consists anything more than a collection of original research. I can't find a single reliable reference to this type of music. The lone external link in the article points to an obscure record label's website. Some of the bands that supposedly fall under this genre's umbrella might be notable, but the proposition that they can be reliably sourced as being "crust punk" is dubious. If someone can produce reliable sources, I'll reconsider my position; but even then, the music genre would be bettter served by a modest section in the grindcore or hardcore punk article. I expect this will generate a fair amount of controversy among certain fans of the music, but instead of merely objecting, please provide counter-evidence (in the form of references) to my assertion that this is not a notable genre of music.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 23:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related page for obvious reasons:
 * --The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 23:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Without a doubt, keep this. Crust punk is extremely influential. They've been covered by thousands of zines. They've also partially contributed to anarchism (this is fact). It should, however, be rewritten, as indeed, many issues addressed previously compromise the integrity of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Groar! (talk • contribs).


 * Keep with major work. The genre does exist, and Google shows more than a million hits. Unfortunately I couldn't find anything verifiable, so I'm afraid it will probably be deleted (which it should if no one comes up with anything). So while I think it "should" have an article, it probably doesn't stand a chance of passing WP:V. Faithlessthewonderboy 00:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I did a google search as a well, and though the results were immense, I couldn't find a single reliable source among them.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 00:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * this book published by SUNY Press is the best reference I've found. The all music guide entries for amebix and nausea also mention their influence on crust.  If you search lexis-nexis, you can find a few newspaper articles describing non-notable bands as crust, but nothing useful.  In theory anarcho-punk would probably be the best thing to merge it into, but I guess there's not really anything to merge since the article is totally unreferenced.  Sad.--P4k 01:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep, I'll start citing references and asking more people with an interest in it to start editing. I could post some links to myspaces, but they're classed as punk bands because it doesn't have a crust genre. Ugly you


 * Keep There are countless magazine articles about crust. the magazines Profane Existence and Maximum RocknRoll, for instance, have both published numerous articles about crust and crust bands. the book "the day the country died" by ian glasper also makes references to crust, although it is primarily about anarchopunk. this article is pretty miserable and needs a complete overhaul but crust punk *is* a notable genre and subculture. i'm sure that reliable information about it is pretty scarce online, but it exists in abundance in print. Sokeripupu 00:39, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep in mind that Profane Existence and MRR are probably not reliable sources.--P4k 00:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * well in that case i guess the entirety of diy and underground punk is not notable, except for like, fugazi. well, whatever. i agree that anarchopunk would be the best place to put crust if it was to be merged, i also agree that what's in the article now isn't worth merging anyway. i'm not changing my vote though. Sokeripupu 00:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. If we had a decent article written from those sources I wouldn't complain, but I don't know if they really have "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy."--P4k 08:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I wish I hadn't said this. They're probably reliable for this topic, and I know I've used worse references.--P4k 03:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge Page started April 2004 - presumably by fans - and still no references. If those who could be expected to know best can't give proper ref's over three years, we have a problem. Assertions of many - uncited - references on this page does not help the cause. And just to be clear - Bob Dylan was "extremely influential". This is a splinter of a sub-genre. MarkinBoston 22:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep given that is has significant mention in both an academic reference and another book by Allan Antliff, and various other less significant mentions, it seems that it should pass V criteria. &mdash;siro&chi;o 22:44, 25 August 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.