Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turk 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. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 02:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Turk rock

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Speedy Delete Fails WP:MUSIC, WP:N, WP:RS, WP:V and WP:ATT, and satisfies speedy delete criteria by failing to assert notability. DarkSaber2k 13:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC) I said "emerging" because it is still a small niche genre of music. This does not mean that it doesn't exist. It does, and is a part of the underground music scene here. I think it is an asset to Wikipedia that even very obscure genres of music are covered, not a negative thing. If you like, I can remove the word "emerge" from the article.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions.   -- DarkSaber2k 13:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Emerging genres of music do not belong in an encyclopedia until they have emerged, because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Jerry 15:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - "emerging" means that this is a neologism, or crystal ballery. --Haemo 21:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

If "Stoner rock" and particularly "Swamp rock" are valid Wikipedia categories, there's no reason for turk rock to be excluded. The idea of "stoner metal" is a completely dubious and arbitrary categorization. Nobody I know, if I asked them what Blue Oyster Cult or Black Sabbath were, would say "oh, it's stoner metal." They'd say it's "metal." The stoner label is pointless. Tons of people who listen to all kinds of music are "stoners" - the grouping of a few random bands into the "stoner meal" category seems arbitrary. Same goes for "swamp rock." All the bands in that category are basically Southern rock - just because they use banjos, all of a sudden the "swamp rock" category is created? By the way, there are no citations or sources on the "swamp rock" page. The term is nebulous and vague.
 * WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. If that's the only arguement you have for inclusion (Articles x and y exist, so Z should as well) then this article is in trouble. DarkSaber2k 09:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

If I'm able to come up with some citations and proof of notability in the near future, can this article be re-submitted for inclusion?
 * As long as the sources are reliable, I don't think there would be any problem with re-submitting it. But that is my personal opinion, naturally. DarkSaber2k 16:43, 1 May 2007 (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.