Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scene (subculture) (second 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 Speedily deleted

[edit] Scene (subculture)

I already nominated this one for deletion as original research on a subculture which fails notability, etc. It got deleted on 5/11 [1]after an AfD filled with sockpuppetry [2]. Then it was recreated, still without sources, etc. So I am nominating it again. The following is distilled from my original nomination, which still largely applies:

This is a terrible article about an alleged subculture, which is actually just a flattering name for 'trendiness'...There have not, as far as I can see from Google, been sociological studies of 'scene' as there have of goth, punk, metal, etc. In short, this is not a verifiable topic, it is probably just a slang word of a particular sort of trendiness, and hence not a valid subject for an encyclopedia article, belonging more properly to a dictionary.

(Note that the term here is not being used as a synonym for 'subculture' (as it sometimes is) but is rather simply cruft written about an alleged subculture, without any claim to notability, verifiability, proof it isn't original research and so forth). The Crying Orc 16:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. May want to look into speedy delete under WP:CSD#G4, recreation of deleted material. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 17:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

A good suggestion, but the article is not (from what I can remember) identical to the last one (which is necessary to speedy delete it, isn't it?). The Crying Orc 17:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The phrase it uses is "substantially identical". I understand this to mean that unless there are major changes either addressing the concerns that caused it to be deleted last time or otherwise making them irrelevant G4 should apply. But I'm no expert, nor am I familiar with the old version of the article. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 18:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Right. There are no really substantial changes (wording only: the content is just as silly). So I suppose the speedy criterion ought to apply. The Crying Orc 11:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unless reliable sources can be found that an article can be written from. Agree with nom that this probably doesn't exist in any real way. Recury 19:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral - 'Scenester' returns a vast number of Ghits[3]. I agree that this is probably nothing, but it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.--Nydas 20:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete for the same reasons cited by the nominator as well as expressed the last time this article was deleted. Really, looks like something made up in school one day... --The Way 07:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete because "Scene" does not describe a specific subculture, but is a term to decribe many movements and subcultures such as the punk scene, art scene, goth scene, etc. What this article describes is the fashion trends associated with specific modern music scenes...Mainly the post-hardcore and emo scenes. This article fails on many levels and makes plenty of contradictions that prove the point that it is written about modern youth trends and subcultures in general but trys to present them as one specific subculture. Rzrscm 17:09, 14 November 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.