Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Underground culture


 * 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. Notable or not, WP:NOR (including WP:SYNTH) is core policy, and the promised stubbifying or improvement has not taken place, so it's deletion for now. This does not prohibit the creation of a non-OR stub.  Sandstein  22:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Underground culture

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

This is a very short article which, in a hamfisted attempt to cover a wide variety of only vaguely-related concepts, ends up saying a whole lot of nothing. In the lede, we are led from the Underground Railroad to Vietnam-era draft dodgers to the American Indian Movement at Wounded Knee. But, very little is said about any of them. The article is unclear as to whether it is about political movements that stayed "underground" because of repression (like the French Resistance) or subcultures and music "scenes," such as mod and punk. It is this vagueness which, in the end, makes the article of little value. Furthermore, considering that all of these topics are already discussed elsewhere (for example History of Western subcultures in the 20th Century), this article should be deleted as needlessly repetitive.-  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 05:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * REDIRECT Obvious original research, unsourced, and unverified as an article, but the title Underground culture should be redirected to Subculture, as the term is indeed notable in this use. I do not propose merge as the contents are OR. Thanks! --Cerejota (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep/merge The topic is very notable but overlaps with the similar topics of Alternative culture, Counterculture and whatever else. Deletion is not appropriate since the term is obviously a good search term.  AFD is not cleanup. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —  Aitias   // discussion 00:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete far far far far far farrrrrrrrrr too vague of a topic. JBsupreme (talk) 01:14, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean-up. Maybe what we're ultimately looking for is a short article, differentiating between clandestine political organizations, grassroots subcultures, & like Edgy commercialized subcultures (or some other division) & directing peops as appt.?  Franciscrot (talk) 02:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Poorly written, vague, a whole lot of air. The article is unclear about anything at all. Proxy User (talk) 06:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep--"If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion." --Jmundo (talk) 17:55, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as pure OR. Trusilver  01:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you explain your argument?--Jmundo (talk) 07:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll play ball. The article is a very poorly executed attempt by the original author to convey a subject that I'm not entirely sure that he himself really was all that clueful about. The end result is an article that says basically nothing, is more than half OR and the rest is complete synthesis. The references that do exist are tangential at best. The article exists within a scope that makes it irrelevant and useless. Were it to be merged into a larger article, I would see no problem with it. Trusilver  08:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Though less than coherent at this point, it just takes soem editing to make an adequate stub. The general concept is notable and sourced. DGG (talk) 08:23, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - dosen't quite go into any of the sugested merges. Stubbifying it per DGG may not be a bad idea. Artw (talk) 03:29, 31 December 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.