Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reception of country music


 * 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. L Faraone  17:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Reception of country music
AfDs for this article: 

This entire article seems to be written by one person, has no links to within Wikipedia, and seems to be an attempt to circumvent the discussion under Talk:Country_music/Archive_1, in which the user responsible for the article seems to have expressed his opinions here. You have to mine Wikipedia to find this article; it appears to be completely POV. Seniortrend (talk) 20:38, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


 * How is the article POV? What opinions are supposedly being expressed? Hyacinth (talk) 21:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Are there Deletion_criteria you think this article should be deleted for? Hyacinth (talk) 21:15, 15 December 2010
 * Comment: This article is made entirely of Talk:Country_music/Archive_1, which was summarily rejected so an editor made a new orphaned page based on the opinions of what seems to be three people. Wikipedia is not an Opinion Piece, Wikipedia is not a place fo an article, page, template, category, redirect or image that was created primarily to disparage its subject. Again, this article is basically the Criticism section of country music as you can see in the history and talk pages. Furthermore, as per WP:QUOTES, "Where a quotation presents rhetorical language in place of more neutral, dispassionate tone preferred for encyclopedias, it can be a backdoor method of inserting a non-neutral treatment of a controversial subject into Wikipedia's narrative on the subject, and should be avoided." This article is made of nothing but them. Seniortrend (talk) 21:43, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * A valid topic for discussion, but I agree, article should be thoroughly reworked (with any intentional or unintentional POV slant eliminated), and then merged into overall Country music article. It needs other viewpoints, and should, in my opinion, also address the diverse audiences that span not just mainstream commercial country, but folk, bluegrass and other associated roots musics, as well. The article's POV is apparent in that the author goes out of their way to reference an obscure performer, Johnny Rebel (whom most of us, even devoted country music listeners, have never heard of), and yet doesn't counter with references to the many dozens of much more well known artists -- especially over the last couple of decades -- who are known as politically pogressive, and who've publicaly rejected anything approaching racism or bigotry.  (Mary Chapin Carpenter, Rodney Crowell, Emmylou Harris, Garth Brooks and Kathy Mattea come immediately to mind, I'm sure there are countless others.)  The article needs this kind of balance, in my opinion, to be valid, and even then (once POV has been eliminated), should be merged into general country music article.--134.174.110.7 (talk) 15:38, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article's style and presentation remind me of a paper where the writer gives "both sides" of an issue intending from the start to prove one as correct. Yet there isn't enough information here to even support the broader thesis that country music is controversial. Of course, we know it is, but after reading this, I'm left with the impression that the criticism is for the most part limited to race and that those raising the issue are largely extremists (e.g., Schiller Institute and Johnny Rebel) making much to do about nothing. While a separate article could be done on the subject, this one doesn't come close to meeting the standard. Allreet (talk) 17:52, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: If Hyacinth is seeking valid grounds by which to advocate deletion - as opposed to mere editing for the article's numerous peacock and weasel terms - I've sure got them: WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH and WP:SOAPBOX. That country music is "controversial" at the face of it is an unusual premise that even its detractors would likely reject, but, oh, that's my opinion. Quite different from the opinion piece masquerading here as an article, but one nonetheless.   Ravenswing  18:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Without reviewing all of the policy links, etc, whcih in the end seem to be merely guidelines subject to interpretation, I have to say that I don't know why anyone would eb interested in an "encyclopedic" article on something that would best be covered in a discussion forum, or an academic treatment, or a just plain opinion piece. If someone wants to bring facts on record sales, or the demographics of those those sales, concert attendence figures, number and location of radio stations devoted to country western by decade, etc, that may be pretinent. (In fact some of that information is in the article. But this article nominated for deletion seems out of place in wikipedia. Furthermore, the material in the artcle under discussion does not seem appropriate for an encycopedia. In summary, I am in favor of deletion. Steve Pastor (talk) 19:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - I'm not sure what this article is supposed to serve as? It's severely under-sourced and seems like it does fall under a POV. I think a section at Country music could easily be added concerning this topic, but surely not an entire article. Ga   Be   19  23:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete useless. STRONG KEEP Merge select notable, properly sourced content to own section in Country music.  Nowyouseeme  talk2me  00:57, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete blatant WP:SYNTH and WP:SOAPBOX. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 02:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete it reads like a personal essay and says nothing useful that could not be said more productively in a few sentences in Country music.-- SabreBD  (talk)  10:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - The way I see this is as if someone wrote this for a school project and thought it'd be neat-o to make it an actual Wikipage. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 15:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 17 December 2010 (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.