Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indie music scene (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 keep. j⚛e decker ^talk 04:49, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indie music scene

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

overarching, impossibly broad article subject, which is 90% unsourced, basically just a list of bands and labels. we have individual articles on some "indie music scenes", as indicated in the template below. that should suffice. we dont have sources which show that, say 5 bands in a city in france are part of a scene. The template, and any existing categories, cover this fine, esp. without sources. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 00:22, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Ridernyc, DGG, Epeefleche, Danteferno, K602, Juliancolton, and J04n were involved in the last discussion of this page. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Too difficult to maintain. Would be forever outdated. --Mr. Guye (talk) 01:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by "outdated'. How, exactly? Supersaiyen312 (talk) 06:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

keep I don't think any general article in popular musics is unable to be maintained in WP, considering the very large number of contributors interested in working in this field. I agree it may give rise to disputes about what content is worth including, but that's what talk pages are for. As I said at AfD1, possibly it might be better split, but that's a question for the talk page. DGG ( talk ) 05:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
keep Per DGG and the first AfD. Could use some work though, possibly a rewrite less reliant on the list by country. Artw (talk) 13:51, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. As with many similar articles and lists (and this is by no means the largest one), it requires maintenance. One way that can be addressed is by editors maintaining it; especially by deleting unlinked, non-RS-cited references to bands. But I'm not sure I've ever seen the argument that an article covering a large topic is difficult to maintain prevail at AfD; nor can I say that I am convinced that that is reason to delete. But I'll consider for a moment the views of others who have yet to comment. Also, "basically a list" doesn't bother me overly -- we welcome lists. Epeefleche (talk) 20:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Just like any other musical lists, this also passes on notability. However, it does seem to rely mostly on other Wikipedia articles, so I guess that would have to be fixed. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 05:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per my above comments. Epeefleche (talk) 14:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.