Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pop folk

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) 22:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pop folk

Not even sure what this article is trying to be. It looks like it started out being some sort of sub-genre of folk music. It then starts talking about Balkan music. Then there is a huge section on Muzika Mizrahit. Then a really long list of artists divided by country. The only section that has any sources is the Muzika Mizrahit which never mentions the term "pop folk" and already is covered in Mizrahi music Many of these regional forms of music already have there own articles for Laïka. Ridernyc (talk) 12:54, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 13:24, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Long, rambling article that barely even addresses its subject, nothing relevant to merge. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I see no rationale for deletion. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 18:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about "Incomprehensibly written and poorly sourced synthesis and coatracking"? That's what I read from the rationale. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, poorly written is a reason for copyediting, not deletion. Poorly sourced is a reason to improve the sourcing, not delete. Over-empahsis on the Balkans is a reason for expansion, not deletion. Coatrack in this context seems to mean just that the article is mainly about the Balkans, which is fixable. "Synthesis" seems to mean lack of general sources--but the phrase is not all that easy a search term, so it might take manual searching in likely sources. DGG (talk) 20:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Lost Fugitive.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 22:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-genre. I did some reference digging, but the use of this term is inconsistent and never explained. It'd explain why this was a semi-nonsensical ramble, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 22:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response: It is a genre. Read the intro: "Pop folk is a music genre consisting of both pop music and folk music". And how is it never explained. It clearly states it consists of both pop music and folk music. And how is it a sem-nonsensical ramble? The article does need improvement but there is no reason to delete it yet.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 22:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just look at all those performers from all around the world.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 22:49, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

needs sources I can not find one that clearly describes this as a genre most articles also mention a form of music called Chalga, I'm trying to figure out if the are synonymous with each other. I'm sure there is a more appropriate term for this music which we probably already have an article on. Ridernyc (talk) 22:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm also starting to realize that trying to describe any one thing as Balkan is a mistake since the Balkans incorporate so many different cultures. Seems this article would be way more appropriate if it was something like "Modern folk music in the Balkans" rather then trying to create an umbrella term for 20 different types of folk music. Ridernyc (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The only copyediting that could be done on this longwinded piece of OR would be to cut it down to a stub. However, this is not a widely used term, even by subgenre standards, and who or what counts as pop folk is not well established (further, to the extent that it even exists as a subgenre, the preferred term seems to be "folk pop"). Hairhorn (talk) 21:35, 20 June 2009 (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.