Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monkey metal


 * 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: Promotional Nelogism. --- Balloonman  NO! I'm Spartacus! 07:02, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Monkey metal

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails the notability requirements as a term probably only used by a gamers forum. Unlikely to be improved with the addition of independent (non-forum) sources. Raised as AFD as removal contested by multiple accounts. I suggest the article is restored to a simple re-direct if the consensus is non-notability. Fæ (talk) 13:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- Fæ (talk) 13:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- Fæ (talk) 13:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Monkey Metal is a phrase created recently by members of the monkey lord forum (a musicians forum, not a gamers one) and is spreading across youtube etc. Therefore, if someone with sufficient knowledge of the use of wikipedia could help us create a legitimate page for it, we'd be most grateful. It IS a real genre of music, and many more obscure things have been given a wikipedia page.SwampAshSpecial (talk) 15:23, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have struck out the gamers comment in the nomination based on your statement. Fæ (talk) 18:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have attempted to make the page a little more factual by listing some of the features of monkey metal and its influences. What else would need changing to make this a legitimate wikipedia page? SwampAshSpecial (talk) 01:44, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As per the nomination, forums and the neologisms they invent are non-notable unless they have more general impact as demonstrated in verifiable reliable sources. So to be a legitimate page it needs some reliable sources. Fæ (talk) 06:46, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete and then restore the redirect as it is non-notable. Wizard191 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: there are no reliable third party sources indicating notability.-- SabreBD  (talk)  19:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  14:00, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.