Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Latin Metal (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   no consensus. Improvements to article indicate that it is possible to create a relevant entry. Black Kite 12:06, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Latin Metal
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The page was nominated previously and got an overwhelming and unanimous "delete", see here. I can't see what's changed. No sources whatsoever, just a couple of lines of text written by an editor. It gives absolutely no indiciation of coverage in reliable sources or notability. WP:NEO, WP:NOT, WP:V and WP:OR all apply. Should be an open and shut case. Google news turns up about 100 results, but consider A) How many of those are actually authoritative heavy metal sources? B) How many of those are just describing Ill Nino with a convenient term? C) How many of those are actually describing a genre in detail, as opposed to using a simple phrase? This last one is particularly important, as if we made an article for every single random phrase used with "-metal" after it, we'd have hundreds of empty articles. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 08:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC) — Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete - No reliable sources, fails WP:N Ha rle m 675  08:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. G4. -Location (talk) 10:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Abstain. The lack of sources prevents me from changing to "keep", however, Jmundo appears to be making an effort to build the article. ThaddeusB's is probably right on the "speedy delete" issue, too. Location (talk) 02:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable enough for me and now meets WP:V due to citations provided by Drmies. Location (talk) 19:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and salt. Repeated recreation of material previously deleted.  3 discussions and 3 articles without improvement is enough RadioFan (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Based on subsequent improvements to the article, I'm changing my vote to Keep. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Completely non notable term, delete and protect against recreation -- Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign) 14:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm actually pretty sure Latin Metal does exist as a perhaps Notable subject (maybe Googling that phrase in Spanish & Portuguese would generate more hits?), but this article doesn't demonstrate its Notability, or even come remotely close (pretty difficult to do, with no sources). If someone wants to write a serious article on this topic, they should be permitted to do so.  But this ain't it. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The thing is, it probably does exist as a term. But not really as a genre: no doubt people use the term "Latin metal" to describe heavy metal with a latin flavour. But people use many such terms, just for convenience. Unless there are sources describing a genre in detail, then there isn't really a need for an article, which is unfortunately what a lot of users overlook. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 15:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Just because an article is poorly written is not a reason for deletion. Chuthya (talk) 11:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable (still)  Chzz  ►  15:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm surprised it's even taken this much, wish I'd noticed the "previously deleted" speedy clause, I missed that. As it is I tried a different speedy and a prod, neither worked and so it came to this. Daft really. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 15:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - not sure why everyone is so gung ho about deleting this term. The term is most certainly used to describe a specific type ("genre") of music - heavy metal music with a latin flair.  It is used in a whopping 113 new stories, including some specifically about the genre.  Some good sources include: "LATIN METAL IS NEXT 'REVOLUCION'", MTV: "Puya, Armored Saint Lead Latin Metal Surge On 'Metalo'", and Billboard: "Latinos struggle to prove their metal" to name a few.  Ther term is used by Allmusic, MTV (linked above), VH1, Billboard (linked above), and other reputable music sites. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand I don't like the smell of single purpose account nominator. Latin Metal doesn't exist? what about Puya (band) and other bands 1?  Expand and fix the article, Wikipedia doesn't have a time limit for a perfect article. --Jmundo (talk) 17:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Thaddeus. Not all the references in that search are entirely relevant--not all of them suggest we're dealing with a real genre here. But some of them do, such as this article, which refers to "Bilingual thrash, salsa-core, polyrhythmic Latin metal"--that sounds like a genre to me. Drmies (talk) 17:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment All of those arguing for keep with those sources need to ask yourselves two questions: Firstly, how many of those can really be used as sources? How many are reliable on the subject in question? Many of those google results don't have a reputation within the world of music, certainly not heavy metal specifically, and as such cannot be used as authorities on it's genres. Secondly, how many are actually talking about the genre, and how many are just using the term (usually to describe Ill Nino)? The fact is, when you exclude those that aren't truly authoritative, and those that just use it as a term rather than describing it, you've got almost nothing left. As this article stands, it's next to worthless. Oh, and Jmundo please keep such suspicions to yourself: whether I formed this account for this purpose or not is irrelevant, and such comments on editors as opposed to edits could easily come under the heading of personal attacks. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 18:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't tell me what I need to ask myself. Do you think we're all that stupid that we cannot ask such questions and make those determinations ourselves? If you want to convince others you should start by not patronizing them. Drmies (talk) 22:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to patronize, but I wouldn't need to explain things like that if you seemed to have spotted them for yourself, which you haven't by the looks of things. Otherwise you wouldn't be arguing for keep with such a feeble reasoning. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 06:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You succeeded without trying, then, and you just did it again. Drmies (talk) 14:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, if you could answer the challenges I posed, I wouldn't need to. But you still haven't. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 16:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm glad you can admit to something. Still, I don't feel the need to respond to your objections--you obviously have your mind made up, and while you're here commenting on comments, I was working on the article. This AfD will be closed by an administrator, and whoever closes it will know, I imagine, how to judge references like this and this and this. As DGG has it on their user page, "I do not attempt to convert my opponents--I aim at converting their audience." Drmies (talk) 17:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand Agreed that the single purpose account nominator is a red flag. Seems like there might be an agenda at play. Lets expand and improve the article. Billbowery (talk) 22:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, keep your personal attacks to yourself. Any more will be reported. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 06:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Note I found an article in the Spanish Wikipedia, Heavy metal en español that should be a good starting point for expansion. --Jmundo (talk) 01:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm impressed with the work to rescue the article. Also, kudos to Jmundo for finding the es.wikipedia article. p.s. Lay off the nominator. An IP editor prodded it, and I deprodded for procedural reasons - it had been prodded and deprodded already - and told them to register an account to send it to AfD. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: There are some factual inaccuracies in the delete !votes. Namely, the article hasn't been recreated 3 times as the 1st AfD (Feb 2007) resulted in keep.  The 2nd AfD (Mar 2007) came out delete based on the state of the article (a single sentence plus a list of bands) & GHITS counting.  Salting the page certainly isn't appropriate for 1 recreation 2 years and 3 months later. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Prophaniti's sock nom. The Real Libs-speak politely 15:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Huh? :S I was the one who nominated it mate. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 16:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep + consider merge to "nu metal" per this source--  C  anniba loki  19:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey Loki, thanks for the link, but I don't think that that review provides a very strong argument for a merge, esp. if you look at statements like "Fed up with the nü-metal limitations of his old band, Ortiz formed Ankla as an outlet to create something fresh," combined with "Ankla builds a solid foundation for a new direction of Latin metal"--this suggests a difference from nu-metal. IN fact, this review is good grounds for adding Ankla to the Latin metal article. Drmies (talk) 19:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * delete should have been removed in prior afd nomination. Wether B (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you read the current version? The article has expanded since last night, thanks to Drmies. It now includes reliable sources and wikilinks to Spanish metal bands. We are not talking about the same article that was deleted before. --Jmundo (talk) 22:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The references all seem to point the term "Latin" toward the band members of these supposed 'latin metal' bands. There can be a "latin" metal band. But there is no such thing as latin metal 'music'. A "genre" is a musical style, not an ethnic grouping. Wether B (talk) 23:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, that is not correct--that is not what those references point at. They point, in fact, at salsa rhythms, at flamenco-influenced guitar playing, at bilingual vocals. Claiming that they only point at ethnicity is really a misreading of the sources, and I don't think you can prove that from a single one of those sources. Drmies (talk) 03:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The references to MTV and elsewhere, indicate this is a real thing. A genre of music, not just an ethnic group.   D r e a m Focus  19:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Next thing someone will invent the term "World metal" Fair Deal (talk) 23:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you have an actual argument? Drmies (talk) 00:58, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Too late, it has already been invented: http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:3nfixqealdae --Bardin (talk) 06:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha, the phrase "largely unrecognized 'World Metal' sub-genre" is really kind of funny. I won't be writing that article anytime soon. Drmies (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Even in this newly-cited form, how much of worth is there in this article? Most of the footnotes don't actually talk about "latin metal", most of them just use the phrase. Allmusic, for example: it doesn't give "latin metal" as a genre/style, it just uses the phrase as a convenient descriptor for a metal band that features some latin music elements, and that in itself isn't much good for supporting a whole article. Most of that "History" section isn't even related to "latin metal", but rather latin music with occasional mentions of heavy metal; and the rest is just a short band list. In addition, only half the sources really strike me as genuinely authoritative on rock music/heavy metal. Please read and consider my points, even if you ultimately disagree with them, that's all I ask. Justgimmethedamnaccount (talk) 18:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Sources look pretty solid, and I don't have any issues with the content (except that list sitting in the middle, that could be re-worked). Passes WP:N handily, in my opinion, and I've actually heard the phrase used IRL. --King Öomie 15:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with you on the list. Drmies (talk) 19:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The sources seem to refer to Metal that is Latin american not "Latin Metal" as a specific genre, making this original research/synthesis. Even still there are issues with notability and WP:UNDUE.  Triplestop  x3  16:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Even with a few sources I just don't see evidence this is a notable genre.  Triplestop  x3  22:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: Even if the sources were only referring to "Metal music made by Latinos" (which does not appear to be the case) that wouldn't be a reason for deletion. "Isn't a real music genre" isn't a deletion criteria outlined in any policy document, but instead is a type of IDONTLIKEIT argument. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Thaddeus. As I said above, the sources do not make any such statement. See, for instance, the Allmusic overview of Ill Nino: "The New Jersey-based Latin metal sextet Ill Nino ... Most of its members are of South American descent, resulting in a type of music that combines crunchy heavy metal with Latin rhythms and lyrics that alternate between English and Spanish. ... to quote Chavarri, "The idea is to be as heavy as possible and as melodic as possible -- with a Latin twist")." The terminology here is crystal clear. The band comes from New Jersey, which is not a "Latin" state. Most of its members are "of South American descent" (and there's a lot more to South American than just Latin!), but not all. The remark on Latin rhythms and bilingual lyrics clearly establishes that we are dealing here NOT with a geographical or racial application of the term, but with a cultural one. In the same way that Celtic metal isn't necessarily made by Celts (whatever that may mean today), Latin metal isn't metal made by "Latins" or in "Latinia" (it's made in New Jersey, California, Spain, Argentina, etc.). Drmies (talk) 19:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep based on the improvements to the article, and the arguments put forward by User:Drmies and others. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2009 (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.