Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emo kid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Redirect to Emo. This has already been done. Deathphoenix 19:35, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Emo kid

Fairly insulting and accurate article on emo culture. Put up as speedy by Thue, but not a speedy candidate. Delete from me, but it deserves a fair trial by a jury of vfders. Meelar (talk) 17:30, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

  • Dudes, this article is totally on key. I definately know like 15 people like the emo kid pictured. Good article
  • I think he may have somethings right, my best friend is TOTALLY like that! We always cut him up for listening to Yellowcard.
  • This seems like a total witch hunt. This a biased audience. There is nothing fair or balanced about several of these comments. Damn emo kids getting all emotional. Get a life.
  • No Speedy Delete. Quit being a Vag Führer and Douche Nazis! This article is totally sweet. Emo kids need serious cheering up. God damn hippies.
  • Speedy delete. I marked it as a speedy as it was IMO too far over the top to be taken seriously (CSD rule #0: common sense :) ). Thue | talk 17:39, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
  • It's almost certainly an attack page against the subject of Image:Emokid1.jpg, uploaded by article creator User:Gplefka solely for this article as "example of an emo kid". This is in no way whatsoever the start to an article on emo kids, to which I'd vote either keep or m/r to emo. But I have no objection to deleting or speedying this. Samaritan 17:43, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Maybe even a speedy delete --BradBeattie 17:54, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. Compare and contrast with Technophile.---Isaac R 18:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
  • How about just redirecting to Emo? Cause of death
  • Delete, call that an emo kid? Also laugh at pathetic attempts at sockpuppetry. --the wub (talk) 23:37, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. VERY heavy bias EvilPhoenix (removed vandalism of this comment by 206.245.176.26 --the wub (talk) 23:37, 12 May 2005 (UTC))
  • Keep in light of my considerable rewriting to remove POV and make it more encyclopaedic. id still vote delete on the unhelpful and irrelevant image, but i dont know how to do that. I predict that the author of the article will revert my changes though, he seems rather protective of his hilarious joke. Jdcooper 23:42, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Undelete until the voting's done. -- Bobdoe (Talk) 00:07, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Unfunny joke page. Gmaxwell 19:35, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and undelete, notable subculture. Grue 18:10, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete: I guess I didn't speedy it earlier? Oh, well. Attack and tribute pages are right out. The former are libel. The latter are nonsense. Anyone who wants to know about the dubious "genre" of "emo" can search for it there. Anyone who wants to know if there are kids who listen to that stuff won't need an encyclopedia. (In my day, we listened to Joy Division's "Closer" and stared at the walls. We didn't need no cute name for it.) Geogre 14:50, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.