- 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 of the debate was keep Renata3 06:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another article with NO SOURCES, delete delete delete!!!! Piecraft 17:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This is merely a bad-faith revenge act by the author of a variety of niche-punk articles that went up for deletion. He is correct, however, in that if the article has no sources, then this should be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.89.171.253 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
NO NO NO, please as I echo my fellow editors, don't take this as a personal attack! I am merely pointing out the flaw in this article. Piecraft 21:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 16:42, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Disingenuous nomination by an upset user. - EurekaLott 16:48, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep'. I do recognize the genre from personal, anecdotal experience. It's a valid encyclopedic article. Dnavarro 17:57, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Despite the origin of this AfD as a possible act of vengeance, it is another instance of punkcruft. Only Cyberpunk, Steampunk and possibly Biopunk have enough notability to evade deletion. Endomion 18:11, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep-I hate this kind of writing and don't know the history of the AfD. That said it is a recognized subgenre and I've seen it mentioned in critical reviews in genre magazines. Lawrence Person wrote an essay on "The Splatterpunks" and there are anthologies of it. Scholar Google has 24 results, that's as many as it has for Steampunk. Regular Google has over 29,000.--T. Anthony 18:34, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep. No case made for deletion. -- JJay 20:28, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep, recognized genre term going back to the 1980s. -- Antaeus Feldspar 21:23, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep, thanks to T. Anthony for the cites. rodii 16:23, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as above Ashibaka tock 02:17, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Michael 02:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC) here. There has been no clear case made for Deletion of this article. I say, it should be retained.[reply]
Michael 02:40, 29 December 2005 (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.