Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dark psytrance


 * 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   redirect to Psychedelic trance.  MBisanz  talk 04:40, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Dark psytrance
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems to be mostly original research, can't find credible sources to suggest this exists. neon white talk 13:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Possible Keep Google searches indicate that it does exist. If some can be found that are "reliable sources" then the article should be kept.  Of course it can't be kept without sources, but the topic seems notable enough. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:58, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as lacking reliable sources that describe what it is. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Cannot see any reliable sources on a Google search and none in the article. Fails WP:MUSIC.--  SabreBD  (talk) 20:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley   Huntley  00:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Psychedelic trance would be my recommendation, but alternatively keep it. User Spinningspark found a journal article which offers significant coverage of the topic, but I do not think we have enough sources to write a full article about this specific topic; I think it is better represented in the context of the Psychedelic trance article. Delete Non-notable neologism. --Odie5533 (talk) 07:51, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is plainly not a neologism, there are over a quarter of a million ghits for the term.  This book source (Portuguese) uses the term. And this journal article on the subject,
 * Botond Vitos, "The inverted sublimity of the dark psytrance dance floor", Dancecult: Journal of Electronic Dance Music Culture, Vol 1, No 1 (2009)
 * I would have thought counted as a reliable source.  Spinning Spark  18:22, 24 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vacation nine 00:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - A quarter of a million ghits are not really relevant to a debate about notability, since they seem to consist of things that are explicitly not reliable sources, such as self promotion on Facebook and Youtube. This is pretty much a definition of what an internet neologism looks like. That is not to say that it does not exist in some sense, just that this is not evidence that it is yet notable for an encyclopedia. I cannot comment on the Portuguese book, as I cannot read the context and in any case this is the English Wikipedia. The journal article is more of an issue and probably the best argument for notability. The journal calls itself "a peer-reviewed, open-access e-journal for the study of electronic dance music culture" and looks like one in the way it is set out, but the article does not read like an academic article. It is full of serious grammatical errors and unsupported (and frankly unsupportable) statements. Most strikingly it is only 1,250 words long - which makes for a very, very short academic article. I am not sure if we should take this as a reliable source, but it may be useful for those who have commented previously to give an opinion on this. I remain open to being convinced, but cannot change my delete at this time. There is still insufficient evidence of notability.--  SabreBD  (talk) 13:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * As I was reading the article, I was confused as well, but I just figured that's how all music journals were since I'd never read one. The article is written like a personal essay more than an article for an esteemed journal. It only cites three references, none of which are other journal articles, so it does not build on existing research. There are no footnotes, which is actually not surprising given the content of the article. Additionally, there is no direct contact email for the author. I think we should consider the journal WP:FRINGE unless and until it can be shown otherwise. --Odie5533 (talk) 17:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not point out the number of ghits because I thought they were all reliable. Most of them are probably no use for verifying any facts.  Rather, I quoted the quarter of million figure to show that the term was not something made up one day.  That is, the term is actually in general use;  the criterion for inclusion in dictionaries (see Wiktionary:CFI for instance).  This is a totally different issue to notability and verifiability, which must also be met for inclusion here of course.  But it is unrealistic to expect to find a large corpora of scholarly articles on such subjects.  The vast majority of music articles on Wikipedia get by on far less than what we have here.


 * There is no policy against foreign language sources at Wikipedia, in fact, a worldwide encyclopaedia will kind of require them if it is achieve its goals. Those of us that cannot read the language are required to assume good faith of those that can. Here are two snippets from a (not very good) machine translation of the Portuguese book;
 * That edition of Trancendence, the two also had the honor of commanding the CDJ's main runway for an hour and a half of intense dark psytrance.
 * Around eleven o'clock, former politicial and military stunted girl's father had left behind all the allure of colored lights and haunted dark psytrance, and, in the relative calm of camping, de-dicaram to a exciting combat "lock" until four in the morning.


 * There are also a few sources thrown up in gnews; "Converting Digitarians" (Danish), "N.A.S.A project" (Dutch), "Alle påskens fester 2010" (Danish), "Trance Energy" (Australian), "Dj israelita no Populos Inn" (Portuguese). Gnews is also showing snippets of articles in Jornal da Madeira (Portuguese) and Le petit bulletin Grenoble (French) but seems unable to retrieve the full page.  All this shows at the very least that this is a worldwide phenomenon and not a simple neologism.  Spinning  Spark  21:31, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * None of those sources appear to provide significant coverage. Though I do agree with you regarding using foreign sources. --Odie5533 (talk) 02:13, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Psychedelic trance. It certainly exists, but what we lack is verifiable detail that would support a standalone article. It can be summarized adequately at the Psychedelic trance article. --Michig (talk) 09:53, 2 December 2012 (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.