Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pop monarchy


 * 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. Hut 8.5 19:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Pop monarchy

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

To quote Closeapple: "cut-and-paste duplicate of other articles; unsustainable, subjective list with no criteria". &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:Neologism with no cultural traction in real life. List of more or less self-titled people with no hope of objective criteria.  Bulk of article is cut-and-paste of other Wikipedia articles (from the web rendering, not the wiki &mdash; UGH!) which is completely replaceable by 4 wikilinks in a bullet list. --Closeapple (talk) 08:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, unsourced, probably OR or synthesis. Huon (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete'. It would be interesting to construct this sort of pop royalty, but these titles really have no meaning beyond publicists' claims and there is no discipline behind this exercise.  --Lockley (talk) 22:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Baseless, square-peg-into-round-hole attempt to shoehorn the jazz royalty concept into pop music where it clearly does not fit. Also unsourced and fork-based; also, "King of Pop" for MJ is the only one of these with even vaguely regular application. (Who has ever described Justin Timberlake as "the Prince of pop?" Especially since the role is already taken.)  tomasz.  14:08, 26 June 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.