Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misogyny in hip hop culture (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   keep. Seems apparent that further editing could fix remaining problems. Courcelles 03:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Misogyny in hip hop culture
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:SYNTH violation. While feminist critiques of popular culture have their merits they do not make good encyclopedia articles. Articles that are set up to take the form of X group's views on Y group are almost never appropriate; only if independent reliable sources cover the significance and context of those views, which we do not have here. It is inconceivable that this article could ever be more than a synthesis of feminist essays that hip-hop is fully of bad/evil misogyny. The controversial nature and social implications of Hip hop should be mentioned in article, this here is a point of view (POV) fork.

May I request consideration of the good principle at WikiProject Gender Studies that Wikipedia "is not a space for writing feminist, masculinist or LGBT critiques of society". extransit (talk) 05:06, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 05:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 05:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete sourced only to two articles so it doesn't give a major viewpoint; it's more like an essay built on synthesis of others' work. There may be an article for this topic but this ain't it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 05:58, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Stubbify or Delete. Existing article seems to be largely original research and/or synthesis. However, there seem to be lots of reliable sources on the topic and even a documentary. Seems like a rescue would be possible if someone wants to take it on. Kaldari (talk) 01:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The Encyclopedia of rap and hip-hop culture has an article about this. Other encyclopedia which cover the matter include International encyclopedia of men and masculinities, Encyclopedia of gender and society, Encyclopedia of the African diaspora, Encyclopedia of social problems, Encyclopedia of African American Business, The Concise Encyclopedia of Sociology, &c.  Clearly notable and so our editing policy is to improve the article not delete it. Warden (talk) 17:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Normally I would agree with you. However, this article was originally nominated for deletion over a year ago and no one has bothered to do any substantive editing on it. If you're interested in rescuing it, I would suggest stubbifying it as a good first step. That would at least deal with the major tone/content objections and a better article could be built from there. Kaldari (talk) 18:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Article has been improved. Studies on this have been referenced.   D r e a m Focus  01:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, well sourced and substantive article. --S Larctia (talk) 23:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Absolutely an encyclopedic topic. See The Colonel's refs above. What the hell is up with splitting Footnotes into "Notes" and "References" anyway? I really hate that stuff.... Carrite (talk) 00:35, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. As Warden points out, extensive analysis has been done on this. I don't know what definition of "hip-hop culture" we're using so I'm not sure how much of the content is appropriate (parts of it strike me as being off-topic, but I'm not an expert), but this is certainly a topic, and deletion is a detrimental way of solving the content problems. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 05:06, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'll accept that the topic is notable. I do not accept the enormous amount of synthesis, original research, and irrelevant argument that filled up the article--some of which I've removed. The last big chunk that's left in the article also has those problems. Whoever contributed that should remember that a. the topic of the article is misogyny in hip hop, not the presumed breakdown of the black family or some such thing and b. inserting such content suggests that "black" and "hip hop" is the same thing, which is complete nonsense. Drmies (talk) 02:07, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nominator - large degree of synthesis, content fork and content that doesn't directly relate to the said subject (i.e. first two paragraphs under 'cultural denigration'). -Cntras (talk) 05:44, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Just needs work. CarolMooreDC 12:01, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - the nomination carries no logic, and smacks of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. How is feminist criticism not encyclopedic? Bearian (talk) 21:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What? I am afraid you are the one lacking in logic. The reason why we should not have this essay which parrots feminist arguments that misogyny is rampant in hip-hop is the same reason we don't have an article Idiocy in liberalism summarizing Ann Coulter's opinion of liberals or Jews as a blight on society summarizing Nazi opinion on Jews. What one group thinks of another is fundamentally not an encyclopedia topic. Women in hip-hop is an encyclopedia topic, however 95% of this is OR so its not worth moving. The X bad thing in Y group from the perspective of Z group is classic POV forking. extransit (talk) 22:15, 12 September 2011 (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.