Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Emo

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Synergy 23:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Emo

A NPOV and OR violating WikiProject. Created to define what bands are "Emo" and what are not. Originally nominated a while back; but has grown; but is barely in use. - -[The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 22:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing this is an MfD for the actual project itself? If so, it would be good to actually add the MfD tag to the project page. -- Ned Scott 07:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close MfD - I was not able to find any prior WikiProject Emo deletion nominations. The project wasn't tagged with MfD (lack of notice) and the only outcome of this deletion discussion would be the deletion of the WikiProject Emo talk page, not WikiProject Emo. Close and allow nominator to relist anew at MfD if desired.-- Suntag (talk) 02:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found it. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Emo. And here is another one: Wikipedia:Emo And Punk Music. -- Suntag (talk) 02:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep How does this violate NPOV and OR? The bands for which there are discussion pages have genres cited in their infoboxes, so whatever the outcome will be, it will not affect how a band is "defined" on Wikipedia. WikiProjects are meant to improve articles, not impose OR or violate NPOV. No evidence has been presented as to why the latter might be the case. And there isn't any. The project has grown recently, and is undergoing a revival. --Pwnage8 (talk) 12:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a discussion page of a WikiProject. A Project has to define its boundaries somehow, and discussion is the correct avenue toward consensus. Also, I see no evidence of any policy violations. Lazulilasher (talk) 16:05, 13 September 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.