- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Toystep (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
'Genre' without significant coverage in reliable sources, performed by a small number of non-notable bands. doomgaze (talk) 00:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: There are no notable bands. The list of online sources do not establish notability, in fact they actually do the reverse. Most deal with the same story from 2007/8 about MySpace predictions and mention only one band. MySpace couldn't even predict its own future and one (evidently non-notable) band doesn't make a genre. Its been four years and it looks as if this "genre" isn't going to get any more developed. Looks like a fleeting neologism at most.--SabreBD (talk) 07:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - failed "up-and-coming next big thing!" which never up and came. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:40, 31 May 2011 (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.