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 - Improvements were also in the article with sources added. --JForget 23:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Polish reggae[edit]

I added ((db-a1)) to the article earlier today, a template which the author then simply deleted and proceeded to add a few sentences to the article, although the lack of information, lack of ((WIP)) template (or anything else from Category:Under-construction templates) and bad grammar suggest that this might go under ((db-g1)). However, I would rather bring this to the attention of others rather than go for speedy deletion again in case I'm wrong. It Is Me Here (talk) 18:41, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: nominator has changed to keep below. Skomorokh 13:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
G1 or G3 Vandalism/nonsense/misinformation, total rubbish, unsalvageable. You forgot to mention the lack of an AfD tag, though. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 19:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see how this qualifies as nonsense or as vandalism. It looks to me like someone's good-faith attempt to begin an article that's akin to other similar articles such as Nigerian reggae. Let's not be in such a hurry to delete; let's see if some sources can be located. I removed the speedy tag. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing to indicate notability. No sources or reliable sources. Artene50 (talk) 19:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, eh mon. No reliable sources, mon. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 20:22, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, doesn't seem to be any evidence of notability. The only non-redlinked band in the list of examples of the genre (Vavamuffin) seems to be a worthy deletion candidate itself on first glance. I can't see anything to suggest this subgenre is going anywhere at the moment.

Switched to Keep - I'm pleasantly surprised at the variety of references Paul Erik has found. Certainly appears to be far more popular and well-documented than I expected - certainly seems notable enough now; seemingly a good article could be built from these sources. ~ mazca ^{t | c} 22:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea before I started researching this, but it appears that articles about reggae's presence internationally will typically mention Poland within the first two countries mentioned outside of Jamaica. Anyway, I've added ten references to the article. None of the sources are articles completely about Polish reggae, but all are non-trivial mentions of the topic, and it allowed me to add a fair bit of verifiable content. Keep. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 00:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. —Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 00:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Let me just reiterate that when I submitted this AfD the article did look like a joke, but now I would probably have to agree that it should be kept, albeit with a ((Underconstruction)) or ((music-stub)) template. It Is Me Here (talk) 09:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, credible topic, turns up in Google Books and News searches. A well-referenced stub on a discrete, encyclopaedic topic with coverage in reliable sources and no NPOV/COI/BLP concerns means this is a net positive for the encyclopaedia. Skomorokh 13:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - credible, added another band and refs. greg park avenue (talk) 23:54, 31 July 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.