Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 April 9
 |
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
- 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. Even disregarding the suspicious new user votes, there does seem to be a general consensus that this band have received sufficient coverage to demonstrate notability - though I'd certainly emphasise the point that the article really needs a good clean up. ~ mazca talk 09:59, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Screaming Banshee Aircrew[edit]
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}. |
- Screaming Banshee Aircrew (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails notability according to Wikipedia's criterion on music Paul S (talk) 16:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- KEEP - This band has made notable contributions to alternative music in both Yorkshire and England as a whole. They have been featured in mainstream and alternative press (Terrorizer, Metal Hammer, Dominion Magazine) and online sites not originating from the band itself, including at least 3 books (Worldwide Gothic, Music To Die For, The Dead Travel Fast) and coverage in NME online and the Guardian/Observer. The band secured a three album recording contract in London with a well established record label (Resurrection Records) and have worldwide distribution including product in high-street retail outlets such as Virgin Records. The band also have well documented direct links with notable bands of from around the world, including the March Violets, Wayne Hussey (The Mission), The Birthday Massacre, Bella Morte, The Last Dance, Gene Loves Jezebel, Chameleons Vox. All of the above make the Screaming Banshee Aircrew a band of notable interest to anyone researching alternative music in the UK or the links between notable post-punk, Goth or alternative bands. All of the above is easily verifiable from the entry and a simple google search will easily back up these assertions. While an edit to remove dead links, empty wiki entries or unnecessary material may be called for, this article should not qualify for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddilefey (talk • contribs) 01:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- KEEP - Screaming Banshee Aircrew easily match the general guidelines for notability (no idea on what grounds PaulS has nominated this band? Just as a reminder, the following are the criteria from the notability page, which SBA match: "Significant coverage"; "Reliable"; "Sources"; "Independent of the subject"; "Presumed" Additionally, the band indisputably matches the following from the Notability (music) criteria list (they only need to fulfill one of the requirements):
- Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries except for the following: - Has released two or more albums on a major label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable). - Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
There are other criteria which it could be argued that SBA fulfill, but these are the ones about which there should be no doubt. sheridan (talk) 07:27, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- KEEP - Screaming Banshee Aircrew This band page meets more than one of Wikipedia's criterion on music. As follows: 1) Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. (see citation 26 for Metal Hammer magazine, citation 27 for Music To Die For by Mick Mercer on Cherry Red Books, citation 31 The NME, citation 33 Dominion/Terrorizer Magazine and citation 35 "Worldwide Gothic". Independent Music Press) 2) Has released three albums on an independent label with a history of more than a few years (see references to Resurrection Records) 3) Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles. (see references to bassist/violinist Jo Violet of the March Violets) 4) Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. (see references to Yorkshire's goth scene) 5) Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network. (see references to airplay on TotalRock Radio and URY Radio)Gothtart (talk) 09:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- KEEP - Screaming Banshee Aircrew - This band certainly merit inclusion as a one time active part of UK Goth scene. Paul S has failed to give any justification for removal beyond a scathing dismissal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostmarbles (talk • contribs) 17:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC) — Lostmarbles (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- DELETE - So far, none of these objections are valid. "been featured in mainstream and alternative press" - which of Terrorizer, Metal Hammer and Dominion Magazine can be accurately described as "mainstream"? Similarly the three books cited (Worldwide Gothic, Music To Die For, The Dead Travel Fast) are all published by minor specialist music publishers and written by goth scene insiders. The only mainstream coverage has been essentially trivial as defined under WP:BAND. Resurrection Records is a very minor label, not a major or important indie as defined in WP:BAND. The "direct links", whatever they may be, are unimportant unless they fall within the heads defining notability. I do not believe that goth has ever been the "most prominent of the local scene" in York between 2001 and 2010. The criterion requiring notable musicians requires two or more otherwise notable; even if Jo Violet were notable (she isn't; she played bass for the re-formed March Violets only after leaving SBA, not in the heyday of the former) that would not satisfy the criterion. I do not see any notability for the band at all, we are simply getting stuck in fandom within a local subculture. Paul S (talk) 01:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
- KEEP - Notable as per above comments. Paul S - the above magazines are mainstram publications in that they are widely available in high street newsagents, and have circulation roughly comparable to the likes of the NME (as per their Wikipedia pages) - it's not necessary that they cover music considered to be popular mainstream. MisterVodka (talk) 11:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
KEEP- Just to clarify: Metal Hammer, Terrorizer (magazine) and Dominion are all available in high street newsagents and supermarkets etc therefore can be considered mainstream publications. Additionally, the books mentioned are all professionally published with ISBN numbers and are available in high street bookshops so cannot be considered trivial - one of which was written by renowned journalist Mick Mercer. Resurrection Records was one of the three main gothic music labels in the UK in the 1990s and 2000s (alongside Grave News and Nightbreed Recordings) - all these labels had distribution across Europe and the US, thus fulfilling the criteria of being an important indie label for the Goth_subculture (please refer to Resurrection's biggest-selling artist Inkubus_Sukkubus). Jo Violet is a fully listed and permanent member of the newly reformed The March Violets and has writing credits on their forthcoming album [1]. Also, none of the arguments to "keep" have mentioned the local scene of York but refer to the local scene of the county of Yorkshire of which goth has been an extremely important music and subcultural movement. Please refer to the Yorkshire-originating The Sisters of Mercy, The_Mission_(band), The Cult, The March Violets, Red Lorry Yellow Lorry and Whitby Gothic Weekend - all were active, relevant and important in the period between 2001 and 2010, which is up for discussion here. SBA performed at Whitby Gothic Weekend three times and have additionally supported The March Violets, The Mission (band) and Red Lorry Yellow Lorry therefore meet the criteria outlined above. PaulS - please would you validate your assertions. Gothtart (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
- Metal Hammer has a circulation of ~35,000 and Terrorizer ~12,000 which are typical figures for a hobby magazine in the UK/ROI - about the same as The Railway Magazine or White Dwarf. When you say Mick Mercer is a "renowned journalist" we are getting to the heart of the problem, because he is renowned if you are a goth, but otherwise he is unknown to anyone without a particular interest in the history of the music press vis-à-vis punk rock. Ditto Resurrection Records; if you are part of the goth scene you have probably heard of them, but they are certainly not a major label or even a significant indie label; the only band on their list a member of the general public might have ever heard of is Inkubus Sukkubus and Resurrection only re-issue their albums. When you say that you can buy Music to Die For in a bookshop, no doubt you can if you order it, because bookshops sell books, but it won't be sitting on the shelf - I looked. Regarding Yorkshire you have cited a lot of bands from the mid 80s and besides SBA being 20 years too late for this scene, they are all Leeds bands apart from The Cult (Bradford - next door to Leeds) and not scattered all over Yorkshire as you suggest. This is relevant when we remember SBA are from York and not Leeds: WP:BAND says "local scene of a city" (my italics). As for Whitby Goth Weekend, here are ten other bands who've also played there - how many could be said to be notable: Angels of Liberty, Cauda Pavonis, The Faces of Sarah, Faithful Dawn, Manuskript, The Marionettes, These Crimson Dreams, Torsohorse, Trauma Pet, Violet Times. Paul S (talk) 20:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
- At the time SBA were written about in Metal Hammer, the magazine had a circulation of more than 56,000[2]. The NME's most recent circulation was just under 24,000[3], which is lower than Metal Hammer's current circulation but I notice that you don't regard this as a "hobby magazine" so your views are inconsistent - SBA have been written about in both publications as well as The Observer newspaper on 27 May 2007(circulation then, just over 500k)[4]. The print article can still be accessed [5] along with an additional online piece from the Guardian's website [6]. Being featured in these publications alone fulfills wikipedia's criteria. Mick Mercer originally wrote for the Melody Maker, which was a general music magazine and not a specialist publication, incidentally there were copies of Music To Die For on the shelves of my local Waterstones and Foyles this afternoon because I looked too. I might also add that as goth is considered a relevant contemporary subculture and part of your discussion revolves around SBA only being relevant to goths, by default this would make SBA a relevant band given their prevalence in the goth scene. I'm uncertain where you are getting your information from about Inkubus Sukkubus but their albums have been released, not re-issued, by Resurrection Records (with the exception of 'Wytches') although I feel this diverts the discussion which is about Screaming Banshee Aircrew and not their former labelmates. Gothtart (talk) 22:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
- I managed to buy my cope of Music to Die For from a branch of Waterstones, without having to order in. It was quite a small, provinicial branch as well... sheridan (talk) 14:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- No: re-read. It says Classic Rock's circulation was 56,000, with Hammer at only 45,000. I read Ed Vulliamy's article when it was published, and suspected this was what you were referring to and yes, it mentions going to see them, but it is surely not non-trivial coverage since it mentions in total twelve or thirteen bands, some notable some not; SBA are not the subject of the article. The online piece is a shorter reprint of the same article. Paul S (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- Here is the NME piece. I leave it to those better qualified to judge whether or not this is sufficient to make SBA notable. Paul S (talk) 16:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- I managed to buy my cope of Music to Die For from a branch of Waterstones, without having to order in. It was quite a small, provinicial branch as well... sheridan (talk) 14:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- At the time SBA were written about in Metal Hammer, the magazine had a circulation of more than 56,000[2]. The NME's most recent circulation was just under 24,000[3], which is lower than Metal Hammer's current circulation but I notice that you don't regard this as a "hobby magazine" so your views are inconsistent - SBA have been written about in both publications as well as The Observer newspaper on 27 May 2007(circulation then, just over 500k)[4]. The print article can still be accessed [5] along with an additional online piece from the Guardian's website [6]. Being featured in these publications alone fulfills wikipedia's criteria. Mick Mercer originally wrote for the Melody Maker, which was a general music magazine and not a specialist publication, incidentally there were copies of Music To Die For on the shelves of my local Waterstones and Foyles this afternoon because I looked too. I might also add that as goth is considered a relevant contemporary subculture and part of your discussion revolves around SBA only being relevant to goths, by default this would make SBA a relevant band given their prevalence in the goth scene. I'm uncertain where you are getting your information from about Inkubus Sukkubus but their albums have been released, not re-issued, by Resurrection Records (with the exception of 'Wytches') although I feel this diverts the discussion which is about Screaming Banshee Aircrew and not their former labelmates. Gothtart (talk) 22:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
- Metal Hammer has a circulation of ~35,000 and Terrorizer ~12,000 which are typical figures for a hobby magazine in the UK/ROI - about the same as The Railway Magazine or White Dwarf. When you say Mick Mercer is a "renowned journalist" we are getting to the heart of the problem, because he is renowned if you are a goth, but otherwise he is unknown to anyone without a particular interest in the history of the music press vis-à-vis punk rock. Ditto Resurrection Records; if you are part of the goth scene you have probably heard of them, but they are certainly not a major label or even a significant indie label; the only band on their list a member of the general public might have ever heard of is Inkubus Sukkubus and Resurrection only re-issue their albums. When you say that you can buy Music to Die For in a bookshop, no doubt you can if you order it, because bookshops sell books, but it won't be sitting on the shelf - I looked. Regarding Yorkshire you have cited a lot of bands from the mid 80s and besides SBA being 20 years too late for this scene, they are all Leeds bands apart from The Cult (Bradford - next door to Leeds) and not scattered all over Yorkshire as you suggest. This is relevant when we remember SBA are from York and not Leeds: WP:BAND says "local scene of a city" (my italics). As for Whitby Goth Weekend, here are ten other bands who've also played there - how many could be said to be notable: Angels of Liberty, Cauda Pavonis, The Faces of Sarah, Faithful Dawn, Manuskript, The Marionettes, These Crimson Dreams, Torsohorse, Trauma Pet, Violet Times. Paul S (talk) 20:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
KEEP- Any argument that Metal Hammer and Terrorizer magazines are fanzines is just ridiculous. On top of coverage in these mainstream publications, SBA have had links from the Guardian website and a paragraph dedicated to them in an online and print Guardian/Observer article. SBA have also been featured in multiple mainstream print books. So they more than satisfy both the spirit and the reality of the criteria "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself". They have also had worldwide releases on a known and well established record label and formed a notable part of the Yorkshire and UK Gothic Rock music scenes. Eddilefey (talk)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑Scottywong| converse _ 21:18, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Relist rationale - Hoping for more input from non-WP:SPA editors. ‑Scottywong| talk _ 21:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep - The band is sufficiently notable, possibly by a large margin, based on the number of diverse, non-trivial sources available, for example [1] and [2]. At least some of the article references are legitimate, and further support notability, for example [3], [4] and [5]. - MrX 22:23, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Weak keep per criterion 7 of WP:BAND. Although I am not seeing significant coverage in reliable sources to satisfy WP:GNG: of those mentioned above, the first is a blog, the second a passing mention, the third a fanzine, the fourth a passing mention, and the fifth an interview, they do appear to be enough to verify their prominent place in the UK goth scene. J04n(talk page) 22:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- The issue for me is whether the UK Goth scene in the 21st Century itself is notable per WP:BAND section 7. It seems to me that the criteria for notability are quite strict and there is a paradox, I suppose, in that you have to have been part of the scene to know how tiny it is, which means that you probably don't want the article removed! The band are a relatively big fish, but in a very small pond indeed. I also draw attention to the wording of note 4, "The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself have actually considered the musician, ensemble, composer, or lyricist notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it." and I'm afraid the only non-trivial coverage of SBA is basically by other goths... Paul S (talk) 00:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- PaulS - if your argument is actually about the relevance of the UK goth scene in the 21st Century rather than SBA's profile as a relevant UK goth band, then may I draw your attention to the recent expansion of local policy surrounding the reporting of hate crimes to Greater Manchester police. This expansion now incorporates "alternative sub-cultures" [7] which has been reported by the press to include goths [8] [9]. The expansion was as a result of campaining by S.O.P.H.I.E the charity set up by Sylvia Lancaster following the Murder of Sophie Lancaster in 2007, which in itself generated a large amount of media coverage. If the UK goth scene had no relevence at all within contemporary culture then surely this story and its subsequent effect on the reporting of hate crimes (albeit currently only in Greater Manchester) would have made no impact at all.Gothtart (talk) 13:21, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- But we have, in accordance with what is said in WP:BAND to separate any prominance of the subculture from that of the music scene within the goth subculture. At the risk of digressing, it could almost be argued that the visibility of the subculture in the UK is in inverse proportion to the success of the music; "goth" music was much more popular in the late 80s, because you didn't have to be a full-blown goth to like it, it was much more in the mainstream of British music at the time: in 2001-10 everyone could point out a goth without having any idea there were still new goth bands playing. Paul S (talk) 20:53, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- PaulS - Funny how you didn't mention that initially (though I did guess you had a bone to pick with the modern goth scene). sheridan (talk) 14:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- PaulS - if your argument is actually about the relevance of the UK goth scene in the 21st Century rather than SBA's profile as a relevant UK goth band, then may I draw your attention to the recent expansion of local policy surrounding the reporting of hate crimes to Greater Manchester police. This expansion now incorporates "alternative sub-cultures" [7] which has been reported by the press to include goths [8] [9]. The expansion was as a result of campaining by S.O.P.H.I.E the charity set up by Sylvia Lancaster following the Murder of Sophie Lancaster in 2007, which in itself generated a large amount of media coverage. If the UK goth scene had no relevence at all within contemporary culture then surely this story and its subsequent effect on the reporting of hate crimes (albeit currently only in Greater Manchester) would have made no impact at all.Gothtart (talk) 13:21, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- KEEP This article just needs a bit of structure to it, subheadings, musician page tables etc and a picture would be helpful. Otherwise the information is relevant and content QI, all backed with many references. Paul S, just sounds like you're on a hate campaign i'm afraid dude.
- These pages should help any editors in improving this article:
- Yellowxander (talk) 14:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Weak delete - in my view, the provided sources do not offer a sufficient depth of coverage to be considered "significant coverage". Passing mentions at the end of articles about other things don't really confer notability, so the ones we can use are the ones that discuss the band in detail (though it doesn't need to be the primary subject of the article). The dishonest (and blindingly obvious) meat-puppetry in this AFD doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Stalwart111 06:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- Could we assume good faith from all participants, please? MisterVodka (talk) 20:47, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Just needs some work. They're a pretty notable gothy band, the article just needs work. (I actually have some of their stuff on vinyl, ha ha!) SarahStierch (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. See detailed rationale at the bottom of the discussion. —Darkwind (talk) 17:04, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Hindu Taliban[edit]
| If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}. |
AfDs for this article:
- Hindu Taliban (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Per WP:NEO & WP:POVFORK "Some refer to hindutva supporters as a “Hindu Taliban.”" India: A Global Studies Handbook p126. The article fails on neo as the sources used only mention it in passing, none go into in-depth coverage to explain what the neo is actually about. Darkness Shines (talk) 09:02, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete : A term used by some journalists that too many using it in passing need not have an article.--sarvajna (talk) 09:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep: the discussion for the first AfD nomination seems to have been a rather clear keep, while no real consensus was reached on the second. I don't see why this needs to be nominated for a third time, actually. MezzoMezzo (talk) 10:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Actually the first AFD was flawed, those voting AGF on the sources, however most of the sources were in fact about Hindutava and those that do mention "Hindu Taliban" mention it only in passing, per WP:NEO "To support an article about a particular term or concept we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term" Darkness Shines (talk) 19:39, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know, man. The Dawn and France24 sources seem to mention the term not merely in passing. Not sure if Rediff is RS, though (not saying it isn't, just that I'm personally not sure). I'm still leaning toward keep but I see that others indicated delete. It would help if we could get answers from a larger pool of editors. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- The dawn sorce has two mentions of the term, other than the article title. "Gujarat continues to be in the grip of Hindu Taliban" is one line, and that is it. The second mention is "Compared to the Hindu Taliban, the Muslim Taliban may be less active. But they are very much there." I would not call that in-depth coverage, would you? Darkness Shines (talk) 13:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know, man. The Dawn and France24 sources seem to mention the term not merely in passing. Not sure if Rediff is RS, though (not saying it isn't, just that I'm personally not sure). I'm still leaning toward keep but I see that others indicated delete. It would help if we could get answers from a larger pool of editors. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Wrong, Mezzo, the first AFD was an instance of unplanned lazy nomination, the 2nd saw a no consensus bordering on delete (because two delete votes were discounted rather with a poxy rationale). Hence, it was not that clear. It is not a vote. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 07:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Looking at the references in the article, this appears to be a fringe term. A sentence elsewhere should take care of this in a more than adequate way. --regentspark (comment) 20:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Weak Keep In my opinion i think the article should not be deleted,but as another editor pointed out the sources are really weak.Uncletomwood (talk) 07:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- I don't expect you to change your stance but will try anyhow, if you already acknowledge that the sources are weak (which BTW is downplaying the real deficiency of in-depth coverage), why vote for a keep? I mean what can trump the violations like non-existence of in-depth coverage in WP:RSes, WP:NEO among other issues? Not to mention what a Propaganda-spilling inferno it has been. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 08:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Pointless WP:POINTY nomination by a user who has a clear of WP:COI. The results in the previous AfDs were clear. And the term has a heck lot of coverage online in a breadth of sources. If the nominator can't be bothered to see them, it's not the problem of others. Mar4d (talk) 11:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Read WP:COI and then be so kind as to redact your absurd allegation. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Arguments should be made on policy, not on users. If you only object against a certain user starting this discussion, but you cannot counter his actual arguments, your "vote" is not valid. --RJFF (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Why delete.... just as it reflects the extremism. There‘re lot of articles of the same nature for which no one raises any question. The nominator may not like this article that doesn‘t mean have to delete it. MehrajMir (Talk) 12:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Your arguments fall in line with those that are to be actively avoided. See WP:LIKE and WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Uncletomwood's comment below against Faizan applies to you too. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 13:21, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Are not Hindu extremists there? Why reducing Wikipedia's coverage of them? Extremism is there, and the article should be kept. Faizan(talk) 12:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Re Faizan, yes there are Hindu extremists, which is why we have the Hindutava article. At all the other keep votes, where are your sources which discuss this neo indepth? Darkness Shines (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Faizan,assuming you are muslim,your point of saying keep is because hindu extremism is there,a Bloody brilliant reason to say KEEP.Wikipedia is not for propagation..I hope you know that.Uncletomwood (talk) 07:45, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- Re Faizan, yes there are Hindu extremists, which is why we have the Hindutava article. At all the other keep votes, where are your sources which discuss this neo indepth? Darkness Shines (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete: Taliban a student movement, a protegee of the CIA/ ISI that took Afghanistan back to the middle ages. Isn't it the new Godwin's law? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogesh Khandke (talk • contribs) 13:29, April 10, 2013 (UTC) diff
- But isn't it a term used by Hindu Extremists? Faizan(talk) 13:34, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- No, it is just a term for the Hindutva movement. Did you not see the source I added with the nomination? "Some refer to hindutva supporters as a “Hindu Taliban.”" India: A Global Studies Handbook p126. This term is just a NEO for that. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well, the same is the case for Islamic extremists, they are also referred by some. Faizan(talk) 14:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- What? Do you mean the Taliban? They called themselves that. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Faizan Al-Badri, have you lost it? You really think "Hindu extremists" assuming they are remotely as violent and as pernicious as the real 9/11 terrorists, call themselves Hindu Taliban? Given that these so-called Hindu extremists are the number one rival of Islamic fundamentalists in India, why on earth would they call themselves the Taliban? Is there no limit to this absurdity? Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 07:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- For the record, Taliban weren't the ones behind 9/11. Not sure what point you're trying to make here. This article is over the use of the term in relation to Hindu fundamentalists and we have plenty of sources and coverage showing that this is a widely used term. 07:08, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well, the same is the case for Islamic extremists, they are also referred by some. Faizan(talk) 14:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- No, it is just a term for the Hindutva movement. Did you not see the source I added with the nomination? "Some refer to hindutva supporters as a “Hindu Taliban.”" India: A Global Studies Handbook p126. This term is just a NEO for that. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: per Nom, per the lack of WP:SIGCOV. It's just a pejorative slang used for supposedly intolerant right-wing Hindus. These are living people we are talking about. WP:NEO. More if an article about a very popular and well-noted topic as "Civilization Jihad" can be speedy deleted under WP:G10 and can be framed as figment of imagination, I believe this is also an attack page a fictitious construct. FYI, even the draft about Civilization Jihad is MFDed. This issue and those who are voting "Keep" need to be taken to a noticeboard or at least monitored very thoroughly.
"Hindu taliban" doesn't make sense, they don't exist, even the suggestion is preposterous. [60], [61], [62].How is Tunku Varadarajan now a taliban expert? This is a promotional attack page put up to smear an entire community. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 07:15, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- Comment: guys, the constant back and forth debates from both sides along with instances of uncivil behavior seems - at least to me - likely to lead to another "no consensus" result. I think it would be better if each editor simply states their vote without responding or engaging with others. Though at this point, unfortunately, this discussion has gotten so out of hand that "no consensus" already seems very likely. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:53, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Polling is not a substitute for discussion, mind it. Your argument here like everywhere else, seems to fall in line with "Just does not belong and don't refute others".
Wikipedia works by building consensus. When conflicts arise, they are resolved through discussion, debate and collaboration, not straw votes. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 06:25, 13 April 2013 (UTC)- It's very clear here by the nature of the back and forth arguing, and the discussion boiling down into usage of the F-word, that this isn't consensus building. It's an argument that seems headed toward another lack of consensus. Please consider what I say instead of simply trying to formulate a response to it. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:41, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Why don't you let the admin decide? Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 06:45, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- That's the original point I was making, sir. And that's a bit difficult when you appear to be engaging in mildly aggressive behavior with a number of editors who simply express different views than yours. Again, please consider this general advice I gave to everyone here, including myself. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:46, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Why don't you let the admin decide? Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 06:45, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- It's very clear here by the nature of the back and forth arguing, and the discussion boiling down into usage of the F-word, that this isn't consensus building. It's an argument that seems headed toward another lack of consensus. Please consider what I say instead of simply trying to formulate a response to it. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:41, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Polling is not a substitute for discussion, mind it. Your argument here like everywhere else, seems to fall in line with "Just does not belong and don't refute others".
- Uh...Hindus are extremists? You mean as a group of people? You might want to qualify and/or entirely change that statement, it looks really, really prejudiced and offensive as it is. MezzoMezzo (talk) 09:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Regardless of the poor way that vote was put across there are of course Hindu extremists, it is commonly referred to as the hindutva movement. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Exactly, that's right all Hindus are extremists, talibans, go ahead!! Wow! Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 07:07, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- You might want to reconsider that. Mar4d (talk) 08:23, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- "Hindu Taliban" is just a pejorative slang used for supposedly intolerant right-wing Hindus. You might want to reconsider your poxy attempts to mask the lack of notability. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:31, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- You might want to reconsider that. Mar4d (talk) 08:23, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete: I sincerely beg Wikipedia to promptly delete this page, or else it will be sending out a strong negative message to an absolute peace loving religion on this earth called "Hinduism" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pramukh Arkalgud Ganeshamurthy (talk • contribs) 14:13, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete: Wikipedia usually should not have articles on neologisms and the like (WP:NOTNEO), unless they are of high notability, which could not be shown in this case. (Some uses of the term here and there do not make high notability.) Especially, POV forks must be deleted at any rate, which is the case here. We already have articles on Hindutva and Hindu nationalism which are the established terms for this phenomenon, so a separate article on "Hindu Talibans" (a clearly derogative=POV term referring to the supporters of Hindutva) must be a POV fork. --RJFF (talk) 16:34, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
*Strong Keep - Mar4d has shown evidence that the term does indeed exist. Hindu nationalism and the Hindu Taliban are different terms. Reliable sources attest to the fact that the term exists and organisations such as this exist. Acknowledging the previous nominations, the article should be kept given that there are no reasons to delete it. Further, Tunku Varadarajan a clinical professor at the Stern School of Business, also a lecturer in Law at Trinity College, Oxford University and a graduate from there, his opinion as an academic is tantamount in confirming the existence of such a movement. As an academic his work is scholarly and therefore relevant. As a teacher and an observer of the world around him, it would seem strange for his work to be disregarded and the article deleted. Therefore a strong keep is what is needed. Numpty9991 (talk) 00:58, 15 April 2013 (UTC) -block evading sock puppet of Dalai Lama Ding Dong Beta Jones Mercury (talk) 04:29, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete, does Wikipedia need articles about obscure neologism. Anyhow the terror activities by Hindu extremist groups are already there in Saffron terror. That way, a new phrase Internet Hindus is also in use these days. Do we create an article about that also? --Vigyani (talk) 10:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per reasons given by RJFF and others.Shyamsunder (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
- Comment: The closing admin might want to regard the simultaneous discussion to merge this article into the existing article Hindutva: Talk:Hindutva#Merger proposal. --RJFF (talk) 15:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Compare to the deletion of Christian Taliban, a redirect to Christian fundamentalism. It's highly inappropriate to use "Taliban" as a pejorative for any fundamentalist group. --BDD (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Sources showing usage of the term "Hindu Taliban"[edit]
....But we are worried about In-depth coverage -
- The mainstream Hindu right is a second incarnation of National Socialism or a Hindu Taliban, and shows no signs of being a threat to representative democracy as a form of government.. The Upside-Down Tree: India's Changing Culture, p. 161
- ...The project was conceived in the shadow of the exiling M.F. Husain on a ridiculously spurious 'charge' hatched by the Hindu fascists, and the beginnings of the resurgence of the Taliban goons in Afghanistan; the volume comes out in the shadow of the assault by the Hindu Taliban on young women drinking in a pub in Mangalore... Electric Feather, p. XI
- Some refer to hindutva supporters as a “Hindu Taliban.” Others point out that a small number of extremists have “highjacked” Hinduism... India: A Global Studies Handbook
- ... order to display the glories of India's Hindu past and downplay the role of Muslims, and minority groups of Muslims, Christians, and Sikhs often regarded the BIP as biased against them, the BIP did not turn out to be a Hindu Taliban. Legality and Legitimacy in Global Affairs - Page 280
- The most fanatical representatives of these taboo- driven attitudes today are India's arch-conservatives — the Hindu Taliban. First it was Hitler, now it is the Taliban. A logical mind would say the Brahmins of India are the Hindu Taliban. NGOs, activists & foreign funds: anti-nation industry - Page 202
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- A logical mind would say the Brahmins of India are the Hindu Taliban - wow? Brahmins are living people and all of them are compared t terrorists. If this is any example of in-depth coverage then I am not impressed. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Shukla (2003) has very effectively chronicled the philosophy of the Hindu Taliban. They mimic the jehadis in their action and philosophy. These pseudo-religionists, the Hindu Taliban and the Muslim Jehadis, are birds of the same flock.. Religion, Power and Violence: Expression of Politics in Contemporary Times, p. 151
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- How is it saying anything at all about Hindu Taliban other than a man's ill-equipped comparison between Taliban and Hinduism? Can be merged to Hindutva, per WP:NEO. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Can the Hindu Taliban be Indianised? ...One of the worst fallouts of the destruction of the Buddha statues in Bamyan, as far as India is concerned, is the re-emergence of Talibanism in this country. Not among Muslims who have by and large condemned the acts... (cont.), Russia and the Moslem World: Bulletin on Analytical and Reference Information: page 41
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- It is a question. Not in-depth coverage. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hindu Taliban had consciously desired it Already disturbed for more than a decade, the sacrilegious acts provoked such a wave of angry protest and at a few places even communal clashes... Russia and the Moslem World: Bulletin on Analytical and Reference Information: p. 42
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- Same case. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- But the Hindu Taliban don't give a tinker's damn to concepts like democracy and social harmony, to secularism and rainbow plurality mat... Hindutva: An Autopsy of Fascism As a Theoterrorist Cult and Other Essays, page 145 (by Professor I.K. Shukla)
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- Same here. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- lamented the growth in India of "a sort of Hindu Taliban movement" and said that the anti-Christian violence had placed in clear peril the country's... India today international (1999), page 118
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- Trivial. Can be merged to Hindutva. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Gujarat continues to be in the grip of the Hindu Taliban. The sainiks destroyed the NDTV office at Ahmedabad a few days ago because the channel reported that M.F. Husain, a world-famous painter, was one of the personalities chosen by.... Kuldip Nayar
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- Kuldip Nayar is a Taliban expert now? Can be merged to Hindutva or RSS. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- prefigure the nationwide shattering of mosques or the emergence of a Hindu Taliban. The strictures of the Constitution and the broader Indian allegiance to secularism.. India: A Portrait (Patrick French), 2011
- ...communal, ultra-sectarian dispensation— a kind of Hindu Taliban, which will push India back towards the Middle Ages. This will be a social and political nightmare. Alternatively, the BJP, and with it, the NDA, will come tumbling down like a... Rashtriya sahara vol.10, page 41
- ..This once-invincible national party will look more like a fringe Hindu Taliban as the year goes by...Business World - Volume 24, page 119
- ...Compared to the Hindu Taliban, the Muslim Taliban may be less active in India, but they are very much there. They demonstrated against the Godrejs, a house of industrialists, a few days ago... Institute of Regional Studies, 2008, p. 28
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- Subjective claim ..Speculation. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Govind Nihalani, a leading filmmaker, said: "I fear we are witnessing the emergence of a Hindu Taliban, a growing intolerance to freedom of expression... Spotlight on regional affairs - Volume 18 - Page 189
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- filmmaker is a Taliban expert now? Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- ....The images of the Ayodhya movement reinforced the worst stereotypes of eastern fanaticism and fuelled fears of a Hindu Taliban.... India Today - Volume 27 - Page 24
— Mar4d (08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)) — (continues after insertion below)
- can be merged to Ayodhya dispute or Hindutva or whatever but it is not saying much about Taliban's association or similarity with Hinduism. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Below are the Links haphazardly sorted
- India`s Hindu Taliban, DAWN News
- Catholics fear Hindu 'Taliban', The Australian
- Indians send pink underwear to 'Hindu Taliban' in revenge for bar attack, The Daily Telegraph
- Women say 'pants to Hindu Taliban', The Guardian
- Expose the Hindu Taliban!, Rediff
- Beware the Hindu Taliban!, Rediff
- Attack on women at a bar in India raises fears of 'Hindu Taliban', Los Angeles Times
- Indian bishops fear Hindu "Taliban", Catholic News
- 'Hindu Taliban' enraged by modern Indian women, quote: Hindu nationalists in India have been accused of behaving like Afghanistan's hardline Taliban after women were attacked... Baloch Unity Conference
- Hindu Taliban' enraged by modern Indian women, AFP News
- Hindu Taliban, Sri Ram Sena, Vow To Attack Valentine's Day Couples, Huffington Post
- HINDU TALIBAN: Anti-Valentine's Day Protests In India Get A Frilly Response, Huffington Post
- 'Hindu Taliban' fear over pub attack, Gulf Daily News (Bahrain)
- The Hindu op-ed on Hindu Taliban
- Delhi looks powerless before ‘Indian Taliban’, DAWN News
- Women plan pink panty response to 'Hindu Taliban', France 24
- "Hindu Taliban" drags women from bars, France 24
- “Sanatan Sanstha is the Hindu Taliban”, The Milli Gazette
- Anatomy of Indian Taliban, DAWN News
- 'Hindu Taliban' enraged, GEO News
- Hindu extremists 'will attack Valentine's Day couples', The Daily Telegraph
These sources on the term are in addition to the ones already present in the article. As can be seen, this is a proper term that is extensively used for Hindu fundamentalism, as can be seen in the breadth and large mix of sources above that are from all over the world. Those who appear to be claiming that the term is "obscure" seem to have no idea what they're talking about. Claims like "This is a promotional attack page put up to smear an entire community" are also dumb and unfounded. Just because something has presumably negative connotations or is offensive to the national sentiments of some is not an acceptable reason to get an article deleted. Who freaking cares!? Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED! If a term is widely used, there will be an article of it, regardless if someone does not like it. Mar4d (talk) 08:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- These are all trivial mentions. "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail. See WP:SIGCOV. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. We don't need to create an article on a news story covered in 109 newspapers.
Bombarding an article with sources that only trivially cover the topic doesn't make the topic notable there is nothing that cannot be merged with Hindutva. This is typical neologism. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:26, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- It is not a forum, okay? Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Mar, read NEO again, all of those sources are single use only, "To support an article about a particular term or concept we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term." How many times must this be pointed out? Darkness Shines (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- These are all trivial mentions. "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail. See WP:SIGCOV. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. We don't need to create an article on a news story covered in 109 newspapers.
Closer's comments[edit]
Given the length of this discussion, the multiple rebuttals, and so on, I felt it necessary to outline my closing rationale here -- it's too long to shoehorn in up at the top with the result.
First, the article itself. I will take no position on the neutrality of the article itself (concerning the way it is written), but since one of the core arguments here is the notability of the term, I did take some care to evaluate the sources currently cited in the article:
- India: A Global Studies Handbook: Not significant coverage; it just says "some [people] refer to [Hindutva] as a 'Hindu Taliban'."
- The original NYTimes article: Also not significant coverage. It was an opinion piece, uses the the term just once, and only says "a sort of Hindu Taliban movement" (emphasis mine), using the term Taliban as an adjective substitute for "right-wing" or "extremist".
- The Frontline piece: A column, not significant editorially-reviewed reporting.
- Dawn.com: Can't really evaluate the reliability of this one, it doesn't say what part of the paper it's from, but the Dawn does appear to be a reliable Indian newspaper.
- The several Rediff pieces cited: Not reliable, Rediff.com is an Indian Yahoo-style web portal.
- France24: A reliable source, but only says "critics have called [Sri Ram Sena] a 'Hindu Taliban'". Does not address any possible significance of the term
- India Today: It is an opinion piece merely quoting the original Times "Zeal in India" column.
- Second NYTimes link: This is just a letter to the editor in respons to the "Zeal in India" column, and is disputing the use of term anyway.
- Outlook India: bad link
- Times of India: Another opinion column.
Taken together, none of this is significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. In fact, almost none of these are secondary sources to the use of the term at all, and the ones that are (the handbook, France 24, India Today) are not significant coverage. Therefore, any argument that the term has received significant coverage lacks weight, Mar4d (t c)'s (likely well-meaning) attempt at BOMBARDment included.
Now, to the arguments made in the discussion. On the keep side, we have MezzoMezzo and Mar4d as the only users citing a valid policy-based reason to keep, which is the coverage in the sources. As I noted above, that reasoning has very little weight after a careful evaluation of said sources.
On the delete side, we have several arguments being made by various editors: that the term is a neologism, is not notable, the term is a POV-based attack or POV fork, that the article duplicates information in other articles such as Hindutva and Saffron terror, and that the term is an inappropriate pejorative.
Given the sources cited and the way the term is used in them, I readily agree that it appears to be a term that is not used in serious scholarly or political discourse in regards to the Hindu nationalist movement (i.e. a neologism), and that it does appear to be strongly pejorative in nature. Unlike the Taliban in Afghanistan and its related movements, the Hindu group in question does not use this term to describe themselves -- it is an attempt by certain individuals, those writing the cited opinion pieces among them, to draw comparisons between the fundamentalism of the Muslim Taliban groups and Hindu extremists and evoke an emotional reaction from their readers.
Taking all of the above into account, then, I see no reason under Wikipedia policy to justify keeping the article, and am closing this discussion as delete. I will be happy to provide (userfy) a copy of the references used for adding any relevant information to Hindutva or Saffron terror as appropriate, especially considering the merge discussion. However, due to the non-neutral nature of the term and the acrimony of this discussion, I don't feel a full userfication would be appropriate. —Darkwind (talk) 17:01, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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.
- ^ http://www.myspace.com/officialmarchviolets
- ^ http://www.futureplc.com/2006/08/17/magazine-abcs-classic-rock-and-metal-hammer-post-double-digit-abc-growth/
- ^ http://www.mediaweek.co.uk/news/1145894/"
- ^ http://media.guardian.co.uk/presspublishing/table/0,,2079382,00.html
- ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2007/may/27/popandrock.features
- ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2007/may/27/post40
- ^ http://www.gmp.police.uk/content/section.html?readform&s=C4D5E39C4F3817F680257961004019B9
- ^ http://news.sky.com/story/1073632/hate-crime-goths-punks-and-emos-recognised
- ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-22018888