Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Music and politics

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 no consensus. east.718 at 03:52, 11/13/2007

[edit] Music and politics

Music and politics (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article that started with good intentions but now is hopelessly lost as a totally original research essay. Ridernyc 03:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• Weak delete: It starts off good, but the further I read, the more OR it got. Sad to lose all the content though. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 03:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Original Research. Bummer. - Rjd0060 04:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep I see the makings (or should I say potential) of a good article here. It probably needs a complete overhaul, but I don't think that's really a reason to delete it. If it's kept, I'd be willing to chip in to improve it, though I don't have the time to do the entire thing by myself, hence the "weak" part of my "keep." If three or four other guys (or gals) want to get together and try to save it, I think we can make something decent out of it. faithless (^speak) 07:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

just a warning it's major work. It took me 2 months to clean up concept album and that was easy since I just removed 90% of the article. It will also be a constant job, checking the article at least weekly. Ridernyc 08:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete: Top-of-head musings with no citations. I should know, I created the article. Lancevortex (talk) 11:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep needs to be improved not deleted. A very important theme throughout music. Indeed

There is no such thing as Art for Art's sake, art that stands above classes, art that is detached from or independent of politics. —Mao Tse-tung[1]

with some work this article can be referenced. It certainly seems to be basically correct about the likes of Luigi Nono and Karlheinz Stockhausen. --Salix alba (talk) 14:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

If you look closely the are 5 inline citations, to very good sources, just not picked out in a separate section. --Salix alba (talk) 14:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Original research, unreferenced, POV concerns. But I'm glad to learn of the existence of Stockhausen Serves Imperialism. Sounds hilarious. --Folantin 14:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, in such cases, one should improve the articles, not delete them. Undoubtly a notable subject. 96T 16:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and improve per 96T. Phil Bridger 16:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as having a good basic core of information, and improve the quality otherwise. DGG (talk) 17:54, 8 November 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.