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.
Not enough coverage in independent,reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines. The term has been recently popularized on YouTube but is not discussed in reliable sources nor is the term used, as claimed, in Levy's Musical Theory. While the note progression described may be discussed elsewhere the term 'negative harmony' , to the best of my searching, is not outside of blogs, social media and Quora.(Note: this is a recreation of a previously article deleted by PROD for the same reason) Jbh Talk 16:54, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will add more reliable sources asap, and encourage those who are more well versed in the topic to do the same. I can rewrite it based on whether or not it truly is Levy's work, and describe it better. If it is not, it could be edited to fit this or be mentioned in another article relating to it. If it is, I will source it better or have it be turned into a redirect page for Ernst Levy. I would like it not to come to the latter of the options of each scenario, nor do I wish it to be deleted outright, but we shall see based on conclusions from further research.
Pythasis Talk 13:16, 15 May 2018 (EST)
@Pythasis: It would not be appropriate to redirect the article to Ernst Levy because he did not use the term in Musical Theory (I checked) nor, as near as I can tell, did he, or anyone else, use the term negative harmony in any other reliable source. From what I have read the term has been made up by a guy on YouTube to describe this particular progression of notes. Possibly the concept has been discussed in reliable sources but the term has not so we can have an article on the term. Jbh Talk 17:30, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jbhunley: After doing some research myself, you are right; it was made by a Youtuber, specifically Jacob Collier. Perhaps redirecting to him could be sufficient. I would not suggest this if it was from some non-notable individual, but Collier is an experience musician with two Grammy Awards who has worked with the likes of Hans Zimmer and Take 6. In short, I now agree that it is not deserving of a full article for its lack of reliability and its misunderstood nature, but I still think it is notable enough to warrant a redirect page for Collier. Pythasis Talk 13:42, 15 May 2018 (EST)
Until there is some mention of the term in reliable sources I would be opposed to that. Right now it is essentially a made up internet term. At a minimum there must be a reliable source which links the term and its use to Collier before a redirect would be appropriate. Without such a source there could be no discussion of negative harmony in the Collier article, since it would fail WP:V due to being unsourced, and without mention of the term in his article there is no justification for a redirect. Jbh Talk 17:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Since the term is the creation of a YouTube artist and the source he quotes does not reference the term; the article can be deleted under WP:DEL#6 ("Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions …") and/or WP:DEL#7 ("Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed"). I do not see the point of further relisting. Jbh Talk 04:50, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: We still need input by more people: redirect or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:39, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment@Sandstein: There is no policy compliant redirect target. No reliable source mentions Negative harmony in the context of Jacob Collier. He writes about it online and there are a lot of blog posts about it but no RS and nothing in his article that discusses the term. If the term is not mentioned in the article then it is not a valid redirect target and without a RS it can not be mentioned in the article. Ernst Levy is not a valid redirect either. Collier claims Levy discussed it in Musical Theory but Levy never uses the term in the book – at least a search of the PDF I have of it does not find it. Maybe Levy discusses the concept which Collier used to derive the term but he does not coin Negative harmony as a term. There are simply no reliable sources at all which discuss Negative harmony in general or as the particular note progression described by Collier. Someday it may get attention in the music theory literature but as of now, to the best of my knowledge looking for information both for this AfD and for when I PRODed the first version, there is nothing. Without any RS deletion is not even a judgment call. The article fails WP:V and as a neologism fails WP:NOT before we even get to a discussion of notability. There are literally no policy compliant arguments for inclusion of this subject. Jbh Talk 06:23, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sources have materialized in the past fortnight so it's not unreasonable to conclude that they aren't forthcoming. We should hold no prejudice against recreation if good sources do turn up eventually. ATraintalk 08:22, 31 May 2018 (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.