Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moshcore

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep the re-written article. Joyous 22:50, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

Moshcore
The word is in use, as evidenced by googling. Most of the hits, however, don't appear to be referring to a genre. Several are about a club, or more than one club. A couple local bands may have taken that name, or used it for their album. I see one or two uses referring to a genre, but that does not an article make. Can any Germans verify this? Tuf-Kat 23:03, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable. Megan1967 03:37, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable article related to a non-notable vanity article. The fact that it was "created" by the band mentioned in said vanity article is what convinced me to vote Delete. --Deathphoenix 06:35, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's a genre, helpful to have. Wyss 06:48, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Have you verified that it is a genre? Tuf-Kat 12:04, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd already heard the word used (it derives from mosh pit and moshing of course), anyway look at these two more specific Google searches  and you'll see it. Wyss 22:03, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Interesting... there doesn't seem to be any connection with what those pages are describing and what this article is talking about, though. Moshcore and John Hillerman doesn't really turn up anything.  Therefore, after removing the unverifiable and probably untrue bits, we are left with a blank page. Tuf-Kat 00:07, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * That's because John Hillerman authored this and a vanity page for himself. Hillerman doesn't appear to be encyclopedic, moshcore is. Wyss 01:48, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I won't argue about it anymore, but... we both agree that the text that's there now has nothing to do with whatever should be there. Your googling turns up a number of hits, but none of them appear to have any information to be gleaned beyond the fact that moshcore is a genre, it is hardcore something (metal or punk, presumably), though there is also "wimpy" moshcore, and at least one person feels Helmet (a surely notable band) plays it.  There's no text available to put at this title, unless you know something I don't (in which case, please do write an article).All I'm saying is that we don't generally keep articles because somebody could completely rewrite the nonsense that's there -- it's just as easy to start anew. Tuf-Kat 04:03, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Then the term only needs to be merged into a list of genres.Riffsyphon1024 00:14, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I would be fine with that (though that isn't really a merge, since it's just adding a link, and if the article is kept, it will be a working but self-directing link). Tuf-Kat 04:03, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge, I have heard it as a genre much like the other ones but maybe not a term used as often as the more mainstream genres like "hardcore" or "n&#363;-metal". It could also be merged into an article describing a bunch of genres, rather than have its own article, and only when it has enough information to make it past 'stub' status could it be its own article.Riffsyphon1024 23:23, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * It can be linked from the article Musical Genres, thus helping others find it, and it won't be an orphan. This will work as another genre I found there was Queercore. Riffsyphon1024 20:53, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * It can also link from Hardcore punk, and technically there are so many sub-sub genres, it's not funny. Might as well add 'screamo' and 'christcore' to the mix.
 * I have re-written the article from scratch. Wyss 04:49, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks good, Wyss. Riffsyphon1024 05:15, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Change my vote to keep. Tuf-Kat 12:05, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * ...and one way or another, if the article is now encyclopedic and helpful, it's because you nominated its prior content for VfD :) Wyss 20:28, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Indeed, now if only there was a way to remove articles from VfD early. No votes prior to your rewrite can be considered to count, since they did not vote on the same article, and this version would never have been nominated. Tuf-Kat 22:07, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep rewritten article. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:08, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yawn. Keep it.  &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 03:37, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.