Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mallcore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. —Larry V (talk | contribs) 04:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mallcore

Mallcore (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Dicdef, but more importantly, the article's entire purpose is to disparage its subject - to tag some set of metal bands with a derogatory label, while elevating others to "not mallcore" status. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Akihabara 17:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Urban DICDEF for WP:NFT concept. Largely made up of OR. Providing external links to fansites is not verification by reliable sources. -- IslaySolomon | talk 18:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as above. Article is only used to decry, and there is no sign of it's conclusion going any further than the heads of a small number of editors. - - 'twsx'talk'cont' 19:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand article is NOT for attacking nu metal, I have repeatedly put in the correct info about the subject---that it is viewed as the "proper" term for nu metal, since nu metal is not viewed as metal---only to see it deleted every time. I even referenced this article before only to have it deleted. NOTE TO EDITORS: Metal-Rules is a perfectly legit source in the metal community. If it doesn't meet Uncle Wiki's requirements for Reliable Sources, then I suggest rewriting them. It's highly regarded in the metal community. And mallcore wasn't made up in school, it was made up on a website (metal-rules if I'm not mistaken) several years ago. Not hearing it until now is no excuse for claiming it isn't legit, isn't notable, isn't widely used, or any other such nonsense. Ours18 21:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  • that it is viewed as the "proper" term for nu metal, since nu metal is not viewed as metal---only to see it deleted every time is blatantly POV, and if anything, furthers the argument that this is an attack page. | Mr. Darcy talk 23:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Bullshit; nearly every metal fan I've personally met does not consider nu metal to be metal, hence my statement. Apparently, I'm not the only one here who has had that experience. If Wikipedia talkpages count as evidence, we wouldn't have to even bother sourcing it; look around the metal (specificly nu metal) band talk pages. And for the record, I actually listen to some mallcore bands---I have no problem calling them such. Ours18 05:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete It's rather pointless for mallcore to have its own article. It should maybe be a few sentences (or less) on the nu-metal page. PhantomOTO 23:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete and something used by a small group doesn't make it notable on a worldwide scale. SkierRMH,07:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. You must be kidding me about the "small group" right? Ours18 08:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge/Redirect If the term is synonymous with Nu metal then put the info there. Static Universe 18:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Negative, it has no genre meaning at all, it is pretty much only an insult. As written above, a sentence (one should suffice) in the Nu-Metal article (as Mallcore is usually used on that genre) will be enough, if at all. - - 'twsx'talk'cont' 21:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete The article may need a lot of clean up, but I the term is sufficienty used and important to have its own article. The term is used a lot between extreme metal fans, and it is commonly used on Encyclopaedia Metallum (certain bands even have it as a genre!). The term Mallcore does not only apply to Nu-Metal bands, but also to bands belonging to other metal subgenres, so I think that "a sentence on the Nu-Metal article" would be not right. The term is not synonymous with Nu Metal, although many nu-metal bands are labeled as mallcore by some metal fans. I am willing to re-write the article from A to Z if that helps. --Zouavman Le Zouave 10:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Valid article based on commonly used term.Hoponpop69 23:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as there is no way to keep this article unbiased and in a NPOV. Inhumer 04:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep or Re-direct if it can't be kept then re-direct it to the mallcore site mentioned; Encyclopaedia Metallum. On that site's messageboard every user starts with the title "mallcore kid". So it seems the most logical re-direct. - Deathrocker 08:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment This suggestion should be ignored, as it is merely an attempt to mock Encyclopaedia Metallum, where the "mallcore kid" title and the term "mallcore" are used in a purely derogatory manner. Deathrocker just harbors bitterness towards that particular website. PhantomOTO 20:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, the above comment should be ignored. The term is predominantly (and openly) used on that website, including the messageboard where every member has had the title of "mallcore kid". (a messageboard of thousands). There is no other article on here which would be more suited to have it redirected to. PhantomOTO just harbors an alleged "bitterness" towards the fact. - Deathrocker 09:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Again, the logic behind this proposal is completely ridiculous. "Mallcore kid" is used in the same sense as "newbie" on other websites, and is only used for a little while, until the user accumulates a certain number of posts or points. Also, a search for "mallcore" as a music genre only turns up 16 bands out of the almost 43,000 bands on the website. That hardly qualifies Encyclopaedia Metallum as a "mallcore site." Deathrocker is just trying to associate Encyclopaedia Metallum with a derogatory term. PhantomOTO 15:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment "Mallcore kid" is used as synonymous with "newbie" on Encyclopaedia Metallum [1]. It's just an inside joke - the same way that advanced users are called "Metal demon", for example . It does not logically follow that an article on mallcore should redirect this website. Morrigan 15:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Research Stats Google.com search results...
"disturbed" "mallcore" = 1,500 (a band who's image is featured in the article)
"Encyclopaedia Metallum" "mallcore" = 6,890 - Deathrocker 17:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment That is by far the most dishonest "research" ever. Note that the first two results are from Wikipedia. Maybe we chould redirect mallcore to the Wikipedia page? Did you comb through every source, and see if any of them label Encyclopaedia Metallum as a mallcore website? No, of course not, because that reveal how idiotic that premise is. You're being completely irrational. You have absolutely zero interest in fact, you just don't want to admit that you're wrong. PhantomOTO 17:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Encyclopaedia Metallum is a popular website with a lot of traffic [2]. As such, Google will index many pages from the site, including user comments in reviews, profiles or on the forum, which in no way demonstrate that Encyclopaeda Metallum is a mallcore-related site. There is no logical link between those Google search results and the definition of mallcore. And as others pointed out, using similar logic, we should redirect mallcore to the Slipknot article instead, or perhaps we could redirect the Heavy Metal article to the Encyclopaedia Metallum article since Google hits for the keyword "heavy metal" are far more tremendous [3]. But we won't, because it's a fallacious argument. Morrigan 20:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment You have been warned by an administrator on how to act and communicate on Wikipedia, I suggest you follow the advice. [4]The search results are in no way dishonest, anybody who types the terms above into Google.com will find the exact same results, guarenteed. The first two results of each are to the specific Wikipedia articles "Mallcore" and then "Encyclopaedia Metallum", so yes, I agree with you, the term "Mallcore" should be re-directed to that website's article. Your opinions show Wikipedia:No original research, as you can see by my searches, I have proved that the term is more associated with said website than a band who's image is in the actual article. - Deathrocker 17:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment The results of your searches don't matter, it's the inherent vagueness of a Google search itself. Now, if you had combed through each result, and discovered that most of them actually claim Encyclopaedia Metallum is a mallcore site, rather than stating the fact that one of the titles a user can have on the site is "mallcore kid" or even linking to profiles, reviews, and the few genre fields that feature mallcore within Encyclopaedia Metallum itself, you'd have a point. PhantomOTO 17:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment. Okay deathrocker, let's play by YOUR rules. Google search for "mallcore" "slipknot" == 10,900 results. Remove slipknot and put nu metal in its place, and you get 13,800 results. As has already been said, he's got a vendetta against EM. I have no idea why, but he does, and he's painfully dishonest in his editing policy. And he seems to have a grudge against phantom as well, as can be seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_heavy_metal_bands&diff=prev&oldid=94312658 and here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_heavy_metal_bands&diff=prev&oldid=94312996 Ours18 18:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
ENOUGH. You're all in violation of WP:CIVIL, so please stop sniping at each other. This is an AfD, not a place to hash out your personal differences. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment. This is exactly why I deleted the comment I made before all of this, because I knew Deathrocker would make a big thing out of this. Inhumer 21:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment My biggest problem with the article are the (often an extreme metal one) and the typically hardcore punk fans) comments as they are completely non NPOV and have never been referenced.Inhumer 22:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I partially agree. I think the "mallpunk" stuff should take only a few sentences in the article. The article does need a lot of clean-up, and I am willing to re-write the article from A to Z. --Zouavman Le Zouave (Talk to me! • See my edits!) 10:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete The biggest problem with the term can be seen on this very page. Ours18 saying stuff like nu-metal isn't metal and thus uses the term as its "correct" name doesn't jive with another person who believes it to be synonymous with any mainstream "metal" band. An article for a purely derogatory term doesn't need its own article in this instance and can be relegated to the nu metal page. And what band would seriously call themselves mallcore? What would be the use in labelling yourself mallcore? The whole thing reeks of elitism. If you don't like nu metal and want to call it mallcore fine, but coming up with a better name for nu metal other than mallcore may bring more awareness to nu metal not being metal.Outlaw-Viper 10:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete There's already far too much overclassification of bands going on in the nu-metal genre, and this is just encouraging it. There's only so much derogatory beating of a dead horse you can do until it gets old. The sound of nu metal is clearly cut from the same cloth as the most popular (though not the most hardcore) styles of metal. The popular definition of nu metal being metal completely fits. - Stick Fig 19:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Rewrite I propose to rewrite the article in a more correct form where there would be NPOV and where the bands cited would not be offended. Instead of saying: "This band is mallcore" it should read: "This band may sometimes be considered mallcore by some". I propose that the article be re-written from A to Z and that peaceful discussion may lead to a more positive change for the fate of this article. I could take care of the rewriting, but I would gladly encourage people to help out as well. --Zouavman Le Zouave (Talk to me! • See my edits!) 10:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
User already voted "don't delete" above. Also, see WP:WEASEL. | Mr. Darcy talk 15:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
So I'm not allowed to change my mind? --Zouavman Le Zouave (Talk to me! • See my edits!) 17:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
"Don't delete" and "rewrite" amount to the same thing. Either way, the article remains. My point in this AfD is that this article can never be NPOV, as the title is a derogatory term, and that therefore it should not exist on Wikipedia. | Mr. Darcy talk 17:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I see your point in a way, but there are other articles on Wikipedia with derogatory terms as the title, like "nigger" or "faggot" for example. - Deathrocker 11:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Those terms however have historical significance (and are used by more people) while the term mallcore does not.Outlaw-Viper 22:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Okay, maybe the term nigger and faggot are more used and more significant, but mallcore does exist and it does have the right to be on Wikipedia. I mean, there are stubs about train stations, why couldn't mallcore be there? Zouavman Le Zouave (Talk to me! • See my edits!) 10:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete A slang term, not really encyclopedic, doesn't need its own article. Morrigan 15:25, 14 December 2006 (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.