Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of wannabe-goth bands


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 14:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

List of wannabe-goth bands

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Clear listcruft, inherintly POV and comes very close to being an attack page, too. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Delete This one is remarkably straightforward. Aside from being OR, POV, and fancruft, this list provides no useful information. A quick check shows that most of these bands are considered Alternative Rock, therefore any discussion about their respective "goth-ness" belongs on the respective talk pages of these bands - and with appropriate sources to backup any claims. Wolphii 17:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete "This is a list of bands either attempt to portray themselves as 'goth bands', or are mistaken for goth bands. However, according to many elder goths, they are not". Heh. What would Alaric say? Fails WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. --Folantin 17:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as completely unsourced garbage. Moreschi Request a recording? 18:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Waaayyy too POV, and frankly mostly false: I've never seen any of those bands listed refer to themselves as "goth", or aspire to such a vaguely defined label. These anonymous "many elder goths", I'm afraid, are not a reliable source. I note from the history that the article was created as List of pop goth bands, but still contained the POV content about "wanna-be goths". --Canley 03:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Note similar POV concerns at another article by the same editor: Pop goth. This contains way too much "some would say" and "may have influenced", and of course the opinion of the "elder goths" on younger adherents to the subculture. I will contact the creator on his talk page to stress the importance of NPOV, verifiability and reliable sources. --Canley 03:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. The whole thing is original research, or POV insults, or a synthesis of the two. Un-fixable, in my considered opinion. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 18:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - this cannot possible be anything but totally subjective POV. --Haemo 00:48, 28 March 2007 (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.