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. JForget 15:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Boogie metal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nomination was requested by anon with the following reasoning: "A handful of general music sources (none of them heavy metal specific either) use an off-hand phrase "boogie metal". They don't give any detail on what this genre actually is, so it doesn't constitute sufficient sourcing for a separate page." Prolog (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There doesn't seem to be a single source concentrated on "boogie metal", only very brief passing mentions, so this term fails WP:N. I prodded this earlier, but it was contested by the author. Prolog (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. No notablity asserted.--White Shadows ^{you're breaking up} 17:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- covered by numerous reliable sources (including Allmusic, Spin (magazine), Blender (magazine), CMJ New Music, MSNBC, The Village Voice, etc.) I've certainly seen this term in more use than groove metal. RG (talk) 17:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Not "covered" but used, so that doesn't address the notability concern. Please see WP:NEO, especially the following: "To support an article about a particular term or concept we must cite reliable secondary sources such as books and papers about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term." Prolog (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:So are you saying that CMJ New Music claiming it was influential to stoner rock and The Village Voice citing Sir Lord Baltimore being influential to it are not about the label? Again, that's way more coverage than the term "groove metal" ever received. RG (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The CMJ New Music source is a review of an Aerosmith cover album, and says "In a relatively short period of time, the burgeoning black-lunged stoner-rock underground has mercilessly strip-minded the quarries of "70's boogie-metal, from prime Blue Cheer to bottom-of-the-barrel Cactus." That's an opinion piece with a capital O, it's not at all about "boogie metal", and it doesn't really verify the claim that you used it as a source for. The Village Voice source is about Sir Lord Baltimore and mentions "stoner-boogie metal" once: "But given the scope of their influence on present-day stoner-boogie metal and the level at which they're still working..." As for groove metal, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Prolog (talk) 20:22, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment- Rolling Stone also has refered to groups with the term. While their site is having problems right now with their updates and I can't show the exact articles in which they used the label, parts of the articles can be seen in this google link. RG (talk) 18:13, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete & Comment - Firstly, thanks for creating this per my request. Second, a point I'd really like to emphasise: yes, there are good sources using the term "boogie metal", but do any of those sources actually discuss the genre itself? Do any describe it's history, it's origins, the typical characterstics of the genre? Looking at the sources, all I can see is an off-hand phrase they use. There is sourcing for a phrase, but where are the sources for an actual genre? Even if you feel the genre exists, there isn't enough info to warrant a separate page. 83.218.158.202 (talk) 10:32, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Although the term is in use, there seems to be no coverage of it as a phenomenon, and no consistency in what it refers to. CMJ uses it to refer to some '70s hard rock groups, while the Village Voice seems to consider it a variety of stoner metal (which is a much more recent phenomenon). Still others may be treating it as a synonym of groove metal (it's unclear). This confusion is reflected in the article, which puts old hard rock groups like Led Zeppelin and Blue Cheer alongside recent acts like Audioslave and Queens of the Stone Age, and even '80s glam-metallers Mötley Crüe. It's likely that the term has been coined independently on mutliple occasions. — Gwalla | Talk 18:25, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Gwalla. There is no agreed definition of this genre and the bands listed have nothing in common. It seems to be a term coined inconsistently. --Raerth (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2010 (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.