Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of free party sound systems (2nd 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 Delete. Fram (talk) 15:27, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

List of free party sound systems

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Why has this been deleted, this was a valuable recourse documenting UK sound systems. There were literally thousands of people involved in setting up all these organisations and to delete this list is burying a little bit of of UK culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.101.48 (talk) 18:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I know this was nominated before, but this is nothing but a list of unlinked sound systems. If there were articles about each and every one of these things, or even most of them, then this might be useful. But there aren't even sources for this huge list of apparently non-notable sound systems. If these systems were notable, there would be articles about them. Corvus cornix talk  23:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * DO NOT DELETE! Wikipedia is a source for information. you may have rules and regulations about what is real and what is not, but just because these groups havent had a number one hit single doesnt mean they dont exist! PLEASE DONT DELETE HISTORY! If the groups that are named are unhappy - the are quite capable of deleting there own personal entry.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.0.173.91 (talk) 15:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I tried to enter an example of one of these systems, with photographs, and it was deleted by one User:TimVickers within a  few minutes (while I was actually trying to defend it on the talk page to two admins, and another person pro the page was helping tidy it - thumbnail the photos for me etc). I did not even have time to start putting technical specs in. So it seems the ostrich wants to bury its head in the sand. And the ostriches are the over zealous wiki cops.Robin48gx (talk) 10:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Unsourced, unsourceable within policy, none of them are ever likely to qualify for entries per various policies on sourcing, verifiability and neutrality, and even if they could be, the selection criteria are arbitrary.  Unsalvageable. Guy (Help!) 23:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * DO NOT Delete !!! How can it be sourced if the admins delete pages describing these things within minutes of them going up ???? Catch 22 here. Robin48gx (talk) 12:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

This is the kind of stuff you cannot get documented anywhere else. By its very nature rave is an underground culture. People are not open about these things, because, partly it is linked in with illegal sales of drugs like Ecstacy. Partly its people who want a little world of their world to NOT be of the rat race and the survailance society. You are not going to get citations and good references. Rave culture is on the ragged edge of society, but important culturally. You would not have got good references in the 1950's for the beat culture. Or in the 1960's for Bob Dylan and co before they went mainstream.

Deleteing this would make wiki look like an "old bunch of authoritarian fuddy duddies" club on the internet. What next ? Articles on how dangerous E is while totally ignoring the hard statistics on the drug ? This is what politicians do now. Will wiki be removing the sentences where Jack Kerouac is identified as an amphetamine abuser ? Denying the romantic poets took opium ?

If you delete this "free party sounds" list then Wiki might as well just talk about set theory (done and dusted by Leonhard Euler some 300 years ago) and politically correct versions of non-contraversional history. If wiki can't cope with this slightly ragged edge of society it just becomes a nice squeaky clean university club on the internet.

Maybe my concept of wiki was incorrect. Maybe thinking it was a pool of knowledge that grows and grows, and that anyone can contribute was wrong. Maybe for admin status soon you will need a recognised PhD in the subject area you police. I think wiki is becoming too zealously policed. And deleteing this is would be a good example of it.

Robin48gx (talk) 10:11, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete This seems like an Indiscriminate collection of otherwise non-notable collections of equipment. Q  T C 11:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * is a vandal who threatened to continue to vandalize Wikipedia until they were permanently blocked.   He/she has apparently has a changed of heart.  We'll have to see if he/she is really interested in working in concert with other editors, or with only throwing tantrums until they get their own way.   Corvus cornix  talk  05:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * removing this page would be an act of censorship, something far worse than minor monitored 'vandalism' that I knew would be corrected within seconds IMHO. does the he/she combination mean the entity is plural ? split personality by gender ? or is english not your first language ? Robin48gx (talk) 19:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * As the blocking admin in that case, I would like to say, comment on the article, not on the contributor. Robin's actions have absolutely no bearing on this discussion, as they were not in relation to this article, and he is not vandalising this discussion. - Revolving Bugbear  20:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, his actions were in direct relation to this article, as his tempter tantrum erupted because he wasn't allowed to create an article on a non-notable free party sound system and linked it to this page. And his comments here about admins removing material he created is related to that article.   Corvus cornix  talk  21:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * a tempter tantrum ? more like making a point. AND not in direct relation to this article. I had a very difficult time with wiki administrators when I started an article about the SDS 930. Lots of problems with speedy deleteion and the like. And this was the a really really important event in terms of computer science. the worlds first transistorised computer. Wiki is in real danger off being over zealously policed. If I had not spent alot of time defending the SDS 930 article it would have dissappeared. Admins were wanting it deleted because they did not know what it was, and references were hard to find. By creating the article this linked in with another project in califoria where volunteers are trying to restore and save one of these computers. I still have photos of the SDS 930 in my loft and will scan them. When I do, I will send them to the restoration project. And why would you think this sound system was non-notable. you know nothing about it. I still have my specs and other research along with photos. a little glimse into part of the massive underground culture that is 'free party' or 'rave'. if wiki wants to ignore this significant section of society, then thats probably a problem with how its currently administered and edited.Robin48gx (talk) 07:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Corvus: Unless I'm missing something, SDS 930 and List of free party sound systems are not the same article. So I'm really failing to see the "direct relation" here. This is the place to discuss List of free party sound systems, not Robin. - Revolving Bugbear  21:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Havok sound system. is the article I was talking about.  Corvus cornix  talk  19:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

You already have the beginings of rave culture, literature irving welsh, films [], a whole massive subset of contemporary music, and you want to delete evidence of the technical engine that drives this sub-culture ?????? Even in the mainstream comedy TV shows like PEEP SHOW we have in depth fictional forays into rave culture, but wiki is going to somehow put its head in the sand ???Robin48gx (talk) 11:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS Q  T C 11:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment WP:EVERYTHING WP:LOSE and WP:EFFORT not only wikipedia effort. Think of the logistics of these rigs. Power generation, transport, maintenance expertise, building the things. The problems associated with powerful bass loudspeakers. you need to factor in resonance and the speed of sound in air. How many of you wiki administrator wanting deletion of this could cope with that ? these people are not just a bunch of e'd up hippies : these people are technically skilled and dedicated to a cause. [User:Robin48gx|Robin48gx]] (talk) 11:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete The article appears to serve mainly as an external links directory. There's no indication of plans (or even the ability) to start articles on the vast majority of these systems, so there's no navigational advantage to be gained here. If we removed all the spam, then we'd mainly have just a list of names – which I think goes against #3 of WP:DIRECTORY. --Sturm 12:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There is a list of references on that page. Its not just a list. Robin48gx (talk) 16:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I have started many other articles. When I tried to start one on a rig, it was very very quickly deleted. Therefore your ability statement is disingenuous. Robin48gx (talk) 16:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * there would be more info on these rigs if they were not deleted by the admins. see above. When I started to document one of these rigs it was deleted within minutes. Robin48gx (talk) 12:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're referring to this? I think, perhaps, that's an indication that editors should develop articles before sending them into the mainspace (which you appear to be doing). That said, I would, of course, be supportive of a list of such systems should there ever come a time when there are a significant number of articles on them. But that time is not now. --Sturm 12:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thats a catch 22 argument. Any articles on these systems are quickly deleted; therefore there will never be 'a significant number of articles on them' and then you say the list is not supported. btw that article was in a more advanced state than the one 'archived' for me. I feel that you do not like/understand this sub culture and are therefore destroying any reference to it here. Well WP:EVERYTHING is a principle of wiki. Just because you dont like this culture does not give you the right to destory articles on it. This type of thinking is censorship. Robin48gx (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * How can it be sourced if the admins delete pages describing these things within minutes of them going up ???? Catch 22 here. Robin48gx (talk) 12:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This article has been here since June of 2006. What are you talking about?   Corvus cornix  talk  05:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I am talking about, as you probably well know, the fact that entries on these rigs get deleted very quickly. It seems like a form of censorship.  comment added by Robin48gx (talk) 19:58, 17 February 2008 (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.