Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Porn rock


 * 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. per WP:SNOW. J.delanoy gabs adds 04:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Porn rock

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

No reliable sources supporting the existence of this movement.  Zouavman   Le   Zouave   19:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems to be a neologism, and while I turned up some hits on the term, the fact that it is used does not make it notable.  It is presented as a neologism in the article, which does not itself claim "porn rock" is any distinct genre or sub-genre.  Since it is not a notable music genre or sub-genre, and it does not have notability as a neologism, the article should be deleted.  Theseeker4 (talk) 20:31, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable neologism, not an actual genre or even sub-genre. I have never heard the term used in reference to any of the more notable artists listed. — Hello, Control Hello, Tony  22:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  22:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original research about bands with sex-related names. Zero Kitsune (talk) 22:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Sounds like something someone made up one day. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 22:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: What a ridiculous article, even if it were real the fact it is so obscure and small means it would not satisfy the criteria for inclusion. – Jerry  teps  22:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Erocktica, as the band's former name. - Richard Cavell (talk) 23:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Redirect wouldn't be appropriate as the article is not about a single band, but about many bands loosely gathered into a newly defined genre. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 04:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * But the article would be gone if we turn it into a redirect. I'm saying that the best use for the namespace 'Porn Rock' is to redirect it to the band that used to be known as that. - Richard Cavell (talk) 06:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a bad suggestion, but I think that Delete is long overdue. This article dates from nearly three years ago, when people didn't worry about such things as "sources" and "citations".  Mandsford (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete the unreferenced article then create a Redirect to Erocktica as suggested by Richard. Duffbeerforme (talk) 13:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Original research, missing reliable sources too, and I can't find any. &mdash; neuro(talk) 06:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, at best this is a buzzword which never caught on by the sounds of it. Therefore unverifiable. - file lake  shoe  02:16, 21 November 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.