Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japanese rock


 * 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. --Core desat  05:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Japanese rock

 * — (View AfD)

The article itself says that Japanese rock is simply rock from Japan, having no distinctive qualities that would mark it out as a genuine genre. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 14:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom unless the article gets something which distinguishes Japanese rock from other rock. At present this article is of no use to the reader. Sjakkalle (Check!)  15:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Is "stubbiness" really a valid reason to delete an article? Japanese rock has a history. It is distinct from rock music from other countries. It has its own stars and celebrities, many of whom probably have articles here. Is there another article that encompasses all of those things? The topic is notable, and deserves an article, but it just hasn't been written properly yet. 206.213.251.31 15:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No, stubbiness isn't good reason for deletion &mdash; nor is it the reason that I give. The article states that Japanese rock isn't distinct from rock in other countries. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 15:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The fact that the person who wrote the stub is wrong also shouldn't be a reason to remove an article, it's a reason to re-write it. 206.213.251.31 15:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. JRock is a notable genre, and I'm shocked we don't have a longer article about it. &mdash;   Da rk Sh ik ar i   talk /contribs
 * Delete. per nom. Xzeroine 18.19, 29 December 2006 — Xzeroine (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep. Did everyone miss this edit that blanked almost the whole article as uncited? It also appears the old text was a copyvio. The article on German Wikipedia is a lot more convincing. Prolog 17:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I am the editor who reduced the article to stub length, after it had been tagged for months for its complete lack of sources. While this was all well in accord with WP:CITE, the text I wrote for the stub never stated that Japanese rock was not a genre, but that the term was merely limited in what it does convey about music it is applied to. The more absolute terms are the result of changes made by an anonymous user (200.206.182.205), 25 minutes before the article was nominated for deletion, oddly enough. Also note the faulty grammar. Let me add that I am all for an extensive history of Japanese rock music to be presented in this article, as long as it is up to Wikipedia standards, including citations. - Cyrus XIII 17:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. The stub needs expansion but the subject seems notable. The history of rock music in Japan could be an interesting article. Ccscott 18:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Well, some people say that the subject is notable (contra what it says at the moment), but without saying why.  Others say or imply that I should have used some sort of paranormal power to realise that it's notable even though what the article says denies this.  The article from which an old version was plagiarised isn't very convincing on this front, and tends to confirm that there's nothing very distinctive about Japanese rock &mdash; different bands have different styles, and that's about it.  Oh, and Japanese psychedelic-rockers didn't take drugs...). --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 18:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I am not an expert on Japanese rock, but there are other aspects to consider beyond its stylistic differences. The history is unique to its country; for instance, how did rock develop in Japan and how was it received (both as a domestic and "imported" cultural aspect)? Rock in Japan is likely to have impacts on the country's culture that are unique. 206.213.209.31 19:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be good grounds for an article on Rock music in Japan, or something of the sort, not for Japanese rock. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 19:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a good point. We should also consider that there is a Music of Japan article, which has a rock section (longer than this stub) which links to this stub as the "main article." It briefly touches on rock music in Japan. I'm not sure what should be done to straighten it all out, but I wanted to bring that article into consideration to everyone's attention. (I changed the wording because I didn't want anyone to misinterpret that as a nomination for deletion or anything)206.213.209.31 19:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Most article's linked in the World rock template follow the "[Nationality] rock" naming scheme and several of them are arguably well bodied and sourced articles. The music genre article also states that music may be categorized by geographical origin. Regrettably though, the Japanese rock category in Music of Japan does not offer citations either. - Cyrus XIII 20:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, this is not a "Rock music in Japan" topic, this is about what has been called J-Rock for many years and what is often instantaneously recognizable as different from American or European rock. The stubification was obviously necessary (but perhaps overly aggressive), but this is an article that can be developed along the lines of 206.213.209.31 above. --Dhartung | Talk 00:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- Nqomc 01:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep And it seems that this deletion was brought about by an unfortunate choice of words from an overzealous stubbification. There are a lot of articles in this group with no sources what-so-ever. (i.e. Greek rock or Peruvian rock). There are no qualities that mark any of the various national rock grops as a destinctive genre. But I'll quit my whining about why we're here.
 * J-Rock is a seperate genre that is sets itself apart from "rock". Some of the sub-genres are considered a bit dark and violent. There are serveral newspaper reports from Asian countries that have imported this music about it having violent influences on children. Have some sources:

''Note: J-Pop encompases all modern Western style popular music in Japan. (J-Pop, J-Rock, J-Rap, etc.) So, to find J-Rock sources, you often have to use J-Pop as a search term.''


 * Nippop This is a valuable source for information on J-Bands. It's an internet source, true, but it's edited by Billboard's Asia bureau chief and author of a book on the subject as well as two others Westerns who are highly connected with the music industry in Japan. It's a highly reliable source.


 * Jrock, Ink.: A Concise Report on 40 of the Biggest Rock Acts in Japan "Lovingly written and gorgeously produced... the first book published in the United States to survey the delirious landscape of Japanese rock... This is a work of visual art, about some very visual artists." -- SFGate.com


 * New Straits Times (Malaysia) May 22, 2005, Sunday
 * SECTION: Pg. 2 LENGTH: 761 words HEADLINE: JRock thunders on..ZO: A-ALL BYLINE: Ahmad Nazrul Camalxaman Copyright 2005 New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Berhad

"JRock is not everyone's cup of tea. It is very dark. It's arrangements is also different from other genre of music", said Moon....JRock is unique among other genres of music, mostly due to its darktone in composition and the musical arrangements, while being quite melodious to sing. "It is different. And it is very difficult to play. But I do make up for it by taking up Japanese classes because I just love the language," added Moon.


 * The Nation (Thailand) January 13, 2002, Sunday
 * LENGTH: 1024 words HEADLINE: Japan still setting the trends BYLINE: The Nation. Copyright 2002 The Nation Publishing Group

Aside from creating technological innovations in consumer electronics and automobiles, the Japanese are exceptionally good at packaging, said Salinee Panyarachun, the leader of the JPop Japanese club and a representative for Sony here.

"This Japanese uniqueness adds an element of happiness and cheerfulness [to their products] that no other country could ever copy." .... Salinee of JPop club agreed. "Japanese pop culture does have some tendency towards violence, especially in comic books," she said, adding that Japanese rock bands are also quite violent. --Kunzite 03:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And this is different from much Western rock in that...? In any case, this is a matter of journalistic comments on the music, not the nature of the music itself (and would fit an article on "rock in Japan"). --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 09:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * "JRock is unique among other genres of music, mostly due to its darktone in composition and the musical arrangements, while being quite melodious to sing." -- Singaporian music columnist "Ahmad Nazrul Camalxaman" writing about locak J-Rock bands in Singapore. Did you read the quotes?  They were comments on J-rock from places outside of Japan.  This phenom is global in nature.  "Rock in Japan" is an oversimplification of the topic.  If you want to rename the article, an AFD is not the place. I would suggest that you take the entire series of articles in that template to WP:RM and seek concencus. Doing it one-by-one only creates a patchwork of confusion and inequality. --Kunzite 19:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please Keep this article. "J-Rock" is a very unique cultural phenomena and its impact is affecting the world of popular culture in a way similar to the British invasion of the 60s. I would suggest, however that someone expand this article and explain just what makes J Rock so unique. Maybe a discussion of the distinction of Japanese music and how it differs from ordinary rock n roll. Piercetp 10:21, 30 December 2006 (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.