367:. However, the article is presented as a genre, and not in reference to a single entity. Additionally, there is no original research in defining a performance mode, only in developing one. The theme is not original, and has been used artistically for years and mimicked by many artists. So since the material is not original research, it is not in conflict of interest, and it is not in self-publication by a single source, then I would imagine we'd need a better reason to delete it for being a valid idea than simply that it has not been previously included.
318:, but the use of the stylistic and theatric motif has existed far beyond 2006. The point here is that performers have been using the format for ages, and that simply criticizing a contemporary definition does not erase the use of the genre for many, many years. It's a historical look-back, and it applies. Music didn't start in 2006, people didn't just start applying theatre to music in 2006, and denying that "Rock noir" has existed for a significant time fails to view that very history.
518:, third party sources discussing this "genre" in detail. Articles about the one band do not support the creation of a new genre (we'd have hundreds every day if we included them all) and claims about a long-standing link between rock and theatre still do not justify "rock noir" as being an accepted as a term for that crossover by the music press. Ultimately fails
381:
I agree that then article is well presented, in order to avoid the COI, but how can you say "there is no original research in defining a performance mode", if the definition is merely invented by a band? (the
Italian soruces are quite clear about it: they invented the name of the genre in order to
340:
I could agree with you but we don't have to do or have original research (as you know, we don't create information, we collect it): so, if we found reliable 3rd-pary sources talking about rock noir in a organized way, we could keep it. I did my research and I did not found (moreover, principal
382:
be "more original", but a lot of commenters (also in voice talk) say that their genre is identical to gothic rock). Moreover, I have to repeat: we don't creat informations, we collect them. Where is a 3rd party indipendent source describing rock noir as a notable genre? --
273:
Sorry, did you actually read the topic? Rock noir is born in 2006 (accordly to the article). How Cooper and Co. could be involved? Moreover, Cooper and Kiss are not really close to "rock noir" claiming, as in the article is clearly
166:
326:, but that does not mean Sid is less famous for making it prominent. Logic tells us to expand the article to include the various histories, not drop the information as if it did not exist.
121:
160:
292:
205:
about a genre not present in notable sources, except in statements of
Belladonna's members and by other musician in which there is not a connection.
359:
I'd hate to consider a simple selfish-circumstance for a single band, but if the name is coined simply for personal exposure then it fails the
126:
454:. The argument that there is a long term link between rock and theatre only undermines the case for this being a recognisable genre.--
17:
94:
89:
181:
98:
450:
The lack of reliable third party sources (music stores and forums are not reliable sources) indicates that this fails
148:
81:
550:
40:
57:
527:
142:
546:
494:
434:
36:
239:
for claiming that the fusion of rock and theatre exists, then we had better make room for kicking out
138:
531:
498:
469:
438:
420:
391:
376:
354:
335:
306:
283:
264:
214:
85:
63:
416:
387:
350:
279:
210:
174:
53:
523:
323:
198:
188:
224:
77:
69:
464:
364:
342:
302:
202:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
545:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
490:
479:
430:
322:
didn't invent putting clothes pins in his shirts for the look, it's attributed variously to
372:
331:
260:
451:
412:
383:
346:
275:
252:
206:
154:
519:
511:
360:
515:
457:
298:
228:
115:
319:
368:
327:
256:
236:
482:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
223:
Let's face it, the combination of rock and theatre (when we subject that to
345:(this could be not a English word, sorry), so the suspect of a RO grows).--
240:
539:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
248:
244:
232:
111:
107:
103:
489:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
173:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
553:). No further edits should be made to this page.
251:...and those guys obviously are valid under the
429:Please do not make more than one bold !vote. —
187:
8:
291:Note: This debate has been included in the
293:list of Music-related deletion discussions
290:
227:), has existed at least since the time of
314:the term "Rock noir" may be "coined" by
7:
341:contributor to this page is quite
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
235:. If we are going to boot
570:
411:RO. No 3rd-pary sources.--
64:01:08, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
532:11:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
499:07:09, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
470:09:14, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
439:07:11, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
421:06:57, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
392:06:49, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
377:09:43, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
355:08:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
336:08:25, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
307:03:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
284:11:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
265:10:32, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
215:08:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
542:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
514:. Total absence of any
197:Original reasearch and
48:The result was
501:
309:
296:
561:
544:
488:
484:
468:
460:
297:
192:
191:
177:
129:
119:
101:
60:
34:
569:
568:
564:
563:
562:
560:
559:
558:
557:
551:deletion review
540:
477:
458:
455:
343:single-purposed
134:
125:
92:
76:
73:
62:
58:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
567:
565:
556:
555:
535:
534:
504:
503:
502:
486:
485:
474:
473:
472:
444:
443:
442:
441:
424:
423:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
288:
287:
286:
268:
267:
195:
194:
131:
72:
67:
56:
54:The Bushranger
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
566:
554:
552:
548:
543:
537:
536:
533:
529:
525:
524:Blackmetalbaz
521:
517:
513:
509:
506:
505:
500:
496:
492:
487:
483:
481:
476:
475:
471:
466:
462:
461:
453:
449:
446:
445:
440:
436:
432:
428:
427:
426:
425:
422:
418:
414:
410:
407:
406:
393:
389:
385:
380:
379:
378:
374:
370:
366:
362:
358:
357:
356:
352:
348:
344:
339:
338:
337:
333:
329:
325:
321:
317:
316:current claim
313:
312:
311:
310:
308:
304:
300:
294:
289:
285:
281:
277:
272:
271:
270:
269:
266:
262:
258:
254:
250:
246:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
222:
219:
218:
217:
216:
212:
208:
204:
200:
190:
186:
183:
180:
176:
172:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
140:
137:
136:Find sources:
132:
128:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
71:
68:
66:
65:
61:
59:One ping only
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
541:
538:
510:Non-notable
507:
478:
456:
447:
408:
315:
229:Alice Cooper
220:
196:
184:
178:
170:
163:
157:
151:
145:
135:
49:
47:
31:
28:
491:Crisco 1492
431:Crisco 1492
324:Johnny Hell
320:Sid Vicious
199:WP:COATRACK
161:free images
365:WP:SELFPUB
274:written.--
237:Belladonna
203:Belladonna
547:talk page
512:neologism
413:Louisbeta
384:Louisbeta
347:Louisbeta
299:• Gene93k
276:Louisbeta
255:, etc...
225:Rock noir
207:Louisbeta
78:Rock noir
70:Rock noir
37:talk page
549:or in a
516:reliable
480:Relisted
122:View log
39:or in a
459:SabreBD
452:WP:NOTE
253:WP:BAND
167:WP refs
155:scholar
95:protect
90:history
520:WP:GNG
508:Delete
448:Delete
409:Delete
363:&
361:WP:COI
139:Google
99:delete
50:delete
369:Ren99
328:Ren99
257:Ren99
241:Alice
182:JSTOR
143:books
127:Stats
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
528:talk
495:talk
465:talk
435:talk
417:talk
388:talk
373:talk
351:talk
332:talk
303:talk
280:talk
261:talk
249:GWAR
245:Gene
233:Kiss
231:and
221:Keep
211:talk
201:for
175:FENS
149:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
189:TWL
124:•
120:– (
530:)
522:.
497:)
437:)
419:)
390:)
375:)
353:)
334:)
305:)
295:.
282:)
263:)
247:,
243:,
213:)
169:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
52:.
526:(
493:(
467:)
463:(
433:(
415:(
386:(
371:(
349:(
330:(
301:(
278:(
259:(
209:(
193:)
185:·
179:·
171:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
141:(
133:(
130:)
118:)
80:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.