Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jungle beat


 * 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 Disambiguate to jungle music and Donkey Kong Jungle Beat. The original article could not appropriately be merged to Rock Music, so I have copied it into the talk page of Social effects of rock and roll from where it can be merged. Yomangani talk 17:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Jungle beat
Pejorative term for rock'n'roll with no notability, all sources are weird religious blogs and websites, and a google search reveals that the term is almost universally linked to a video game, and sometimes a style of music. Basically, delete per WP:V, and WP:N. Themindset 17:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nonsensical music "analysis" and disambiguate to the game and jungle music. Gazpacho 17:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and disambiguate. It's incorrect to say that all the sources are "weird religious blogs and websites."  Sources include an article from the New York Times, an article from Metroactive, this audio recording from the 1960s, and an article featuring the subject in Virtue Magazine.  I think this concept is ludicrous, but it's something that exists and is verifiable.  On top of these sources, I've actually heard a conservative pastor use the phrase on more than one occasion (of course, that's original research, but it does help to demonstrate that the idea exists).  Additionally, one of the sources references another published source from Bob Jones University, though I don't have the actual source.  Regarding its notability, my thoughts on the overuse of "notability" as a deleltion criterion can be found here in detail.  This should be made into a disambiguation page and this article moved to Jungle beat (epithet) or something similar. &middot;  j e r s y k o   talk  &middot; 18:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as I am the nominator. Also, an article from the 60s, an article in "Virtue Magazine", and something published by Bob Jones University (not exactly the most credible of publishing houses) do not give a term currency. The google test is pretty conclusive; and even when the term is found in use through google, it is pretty much just a racist slur with no consistent semantic use or definition (other than as "black people" music). It's consistently used to refer to a video game, a style of music, and even a movie... but not what this article claims. Themindset 18:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, more accurately, we're dealing with a newspaper article from the 1990s, an audio recording from the 1960s, a 2006 article on the subject in a magazine, a 1980s New York Times article, and a BJU publication (which, by the way, is certainly a reliable source for what fundamentalist Christians think, wouldn't you say?). On top of those sources, we have the use of the term on the religious blogs and websites.  While these websites and blogs are likely unreliable sources generally, they are certainly evidence that the term is used exactly as the article describes.  If the problem is that this term can refer to multiple subjects, disambiguation, not deletion, is required. &middot;  j e r s y k o   talk  &middot; 18:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Donkey Kong Jungle Beat. I suspect that's what 99% of the people who type "jungle beat" in are looking for, rather than an obscure anti-rock epitaph rarely used today. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  20:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think priority applies here. If an earlier thing inspires the name of a later thing, the name should go to the earlier thing or a disambiguation page, e.g. Hundred Days. Gazpacho 21:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and Expand This AFD is a classic example of common wrong-headed deletionist practices. If something doesn't pass the google test, or isn't something with which the typical North American wikipedian isn't familiar with, then it's put up for deletion. Oppositon to rock music was an extremely important part of American fundemantalist Protestantism for decades, and in terms of cultural history, this opposition, and the terminology it engendered is important. I would prefer to see an entire article on this kind of opposition to Rock music, and the ways in which it was amalgamized with Communism and everything else fundamentalist Protestants didn't like. And there's a lot of material out on these topics, but alas, a lot of it is in academic libraries and not in Google. So keep and mark for expansion. -- Zantastik  talk  20:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I am an inclusionist, important thing to note since I nominated this article. This is a term that is not in currency, therefore not fit for an article. Perhaps the use of the term can be contained in an article like North American fundemantalist Protestant opposition to rock music or North American fundemantalist Protestant opposition to stuff in general they didn't like, or something of the sort. And, more to the point, to me Jungle beat means Drum and bass and is the more accurate meaning of the term. If someone comes on to wikipedia to look up Jungle beats and jungle music and the first line they see is "A jungle beat or jungle music is a beat or musical style that is inherently evil, immoral, and/or sensual"... well, that's a disservice to both the reader and to wikipedia as an encyclopedic resource. PS - the first keep voter is adding the same reference 4 times (at last count), making the article appear well-referenced at first glance. Themindset 20:53, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, how about a little good faith? Everything in the article is supported by the sources mentioned at the bottom of the article (and you miscounted, the source is linked 3 times in the article text, along with two others). Your unsupported assertion that people are searching Wikipedia for drum and bass if they type in "jungle beat" (actually, isn't that Jungle music?? and wasn't Starblind saying it meant a video game? so which of the three is it?) is a dubious ground for deletion when the article is verifiable. It is certainly evidence that this needs to be a disambiguation page, as there are clearly three or four subjects that could fall under the term "jungle beat". But no one other than me seems to be arguing for a dab at the moment, only for pure deletion. &middot;  j e r s y k o   talk  &middot; 21:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that such an article should exist, but that putting such an article at jungle beat would be illogical. A title like Opposition to rock music or Opposition to popular music would be far more logical and encyclopedic.  The question we really need to be asking ourselves here is, "When someone types "Jungle beat" into the search box, what are they most likely trying to find?" Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  12:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge content to Rock music and disambiguate to jungle music and the video game. Gazpacho 21:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, this is a reasonable solution. &middot;  j e r s y k o   talk  &middot; 21:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Commment, I also agree with this solution. Themindset 22:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment As do I. -- Zantastik  talk  22:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Agreed. Sounds reasonable. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  12:28, 12 October 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.