Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistani black metal (2nd nomination)

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. Yannismarou 16:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pakistani black metal

Pakistani black metal (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Right, I realise that this has been nominated before, but I can't believe the result last time. The original discussion can be found here, and the result was a shambles, but a merge (there was actually no real agreement on where to merge it too, either). Now, I do not support a merge, and believe that this article should be deleted outright. I have numerous reasons for this. First, I will give my argument agaisnt this merge; which never actually happened. A merge to black metal would be foolish- there is not room within the black metal article to talk about every country's black metal scene, unless it is particuarly relevent to the genre, as, say, Sweden's may be. As for a merge to the music of Pakistan- well, this is better, but there is no assertion of the notability of the topic. As far as I can see, this is not relevent to Pakistan's music scene as a whole. So, that means that a merge is irrelevent- so why should this be deleted, rather than kept? Well, this article could argued to be two things. First of all, it makes a vague attempt to be about a musical movement. There is no evidence of the notability of this musical movement, and so it should be deleted if it is that. However, I believe that the article is not about a musical movement, and is simply a list of non-notable bands. These bands do not deserve articles of their own, and merging them all into one article just because they are vaguely similar is an awful idea. Let me explain why, with an analogy- I come from Furness. Now, I am reasonably familiar with the local school/garage heavy metal bands in the area. None of these are notable, but let's pretend I want them to have a place on Wikipedia, and so I write an article called heavy metal of Furness. This would be a list of completely non notable bands, sourced from primary and/or unreliable sources. On top of just being a dumping ground for non notable bands, lowering our notability criteria, grouping them together in this manner constitutes original research. Because of all these reasons, I think the idea to merge this information was a bad one, and I think keeping it at all is foolish. The only result I would support other than a big delete would be a split- I am not sure if I have ever seen a split at AfD, but I would support any band proven to be notable to be split off into its own article. However, I have a sneaking suspiscion that none of the bands are notable, and so I don't think that would be an option. J Milburn 19:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, seems like a backdoor promotion of several bands that would fail WP:MUSIC if up individually. --Dhartung | Talk 22:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per well-reasoned nomination. Guy (Help!) 23:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom.Bakaman 03:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Webkami 16:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. There are no references to begin with.. Baristarim 05:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

i was insulted to say the least by the above, being a memeber of one of the said bands. if any of you have interest and experince of the international extreme metal scene, you will find at least half the bands listed their worthy of your stereo........Dusk, Burzukh,Sifr , Northern Alliance are all internationally known unedrground acts.. So to be precise if a person is into black metal seriously he would have at least heard of some of these bands, if only for the sake of being cult enough. This i have found to be true via inetraction.

i think you should give some of the stuff on the net available a chance before coming down so hard on a scene that is unique and thrives on and in chaos. If anything you can compare it to our well known neighbours, India who have a huge plethora of bands (along with better infrastructure, democracy and a more liberal govt) none of which are nearly half as good or original. That is why i beleive the pakistani metal scene is a recognizable underground scne in asia . I thought the point of this wiki of wikis was to be a open free-for-all repository of data..and not localized to any region / ethnicity....

just because it didnt get reviewed in Metal Maniacs or played on MTV2 does not mean it does not exist. That is what wikipedia is there for. real unfileterd knowledge hopin in the best way possibel to avoid biases. at leastv lsiten to it before jugding

• Comment: We are not here to listen and judge- we are discussing the notability of this movement and these bands. Did you even read my reasoning before you posted that long rant? You have provided no information that will help this article survive the debate. You have basically said 'these bands are good, and just because they aren't famous, doesn't mean they don't deserve a place on Wikipedia. Please see WP:BAND and WP:NOT. As a writer of articles about obscure musicians (see Voltaire and Celestiial) it irritates me when people try to accuse Wikipedia of covering only pop music. J Milburn 11:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: The article is now even more of a shambles than it was originally. Anonymous editors have expanded the section on some of the bands, while not providing notability, while the section explaining the 'movement' has been significantly expanded with original research. Another interesting comment placed within it is "NOTE: The concept has never been called Pakistani Black metal. (The original article has been edited, but the popular bands section hasent)" which seems to confirm my belief that this was a movememt made up on the spot. J Milburn 11:34, 11 April 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.