Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Groove metal

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 Speedy keep as per WP:SNOW.

Groove metal

This is not a real music genre please remove it from Wikipedia. Mehplep188.47 (talk) 12:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - there are plenty of independent references to the term on the web (eg here) and in print (eg New Wave of American Heavy Metal, Garry Sharpe-Young). The article may or may not suffer from problems of OR, but deletion is not the answer. — BillC ^talk 12:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nom cites no policy on WHY it should be deleted. Geninue genre of music, although poorly sourced, doesn't need deletion. Lugnuts (talk) 13:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if you're going to complain about the existence of a music genre, don't do it with metal - seriously, it's the Rule 34 of music. As far as the article goes, sources indicate it's does exist. Will ^(talk) 15:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep sources all point to the legitimate existence of groove metal. http://www.metal-archives, http://www.metal-observer.com both acknowledge the genre. The following discussion was realized (some time ago) to address the validity of the genre. As you can see it as determined that the genre does exist and is distinct enough to deserve a separate article. --Pasajero (talk) 16:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bad faith nom. actually it is a real genre. Mostly it's associated with Pantera. Did you do any research before you proclaimed this genre's non-existence? There's enough citations in this article along with mention here and several other sources. Granted people do make up genres, but this isn't one of them Doc Strange (talk) 17:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - such a statement is POV, Original Research and Bad Faith. There is completely no way to delete it. And the section Key Artists included well collected information with SOURCES. You could actually delete most of the text in Wikipedia if you would delete every sentence that has no sources. And that is not the creative way. You should try to add the sources, not try to delete the unsourced information--Lykantrop ^(Talk) 22:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Mehplep you're a moron. Such statements are strongly point of view and this article has many, many citations - verifiable citations. The most notable are from a record company and from bands themselves. Stop being an asshole.DarrelClemmons (talk) 19:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Your argument is invalid, mehplep74.226.157.119 (talk) 20:17, 17 February 2008 (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.