Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scene (youth subculture)

Scene (youth subculture)

Scene (youth subculture) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

What we have here is an article about a slang term, not an article about an actual subculture. The article refers to the subculture(s) that surround hardcore punk and emo music, but "scene," "scene kid," and "scenester" are slang terms for (some) of the people in said subcultures. The fact that this article is backed up by references from Urban dictionary does not help its case. Once you take out all of the unreferenced neologisms you are not left with much. "Scene" and "the scene" as slang terms are much older terms, dating at least back to the '60s, but are very difficult to reference. As it stands, this article is nonencyclopædic and unsalvageable.-RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Original research/neologism of questionable existance/complete and utter miscomprehension of a slang term. Either way delete it. --neon white talk 16:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. This previous discussion is somewhat relevant to the current AfD. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 17:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thought i'd seen it before! --neon white talk 20:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, not enough reliable sources to establish notability or clear definition without OR.--Boffob (talk) 17:34, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOT neologism/original research, and the "Urban dictionary" is not reliable source. --Kmaster (talk) 21:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, redirect to subculture. "Scene" is an adjective which should be in wiktionary or urban dictionary or whatever, but I can hardly conceive of an encyclopedic article on the subject. Kellen^T 22:08, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, but do not salt nor redirect. "Scene" is established as a label of a certain dress style and attitude, from what I've seen is a reaction to emo. I have not seen anything resembling a reliable source on the matter, scene kid on Google seems to give a scattershot of answers, but there does seem to be something there. Frankly, to judge the "scene" scene as a misunderstanding or delusion is presumptuous, and the opportunity to write something once reliable sources emerge shouldn't be removed. hateless 23:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. My problem with you caveat, hateless, is that the AfD I linked to above is nearly two years old, and the article is essentially identical. In that time, no one has found a decent source to define this neologism---or, rather, this particular use of this very-old slang term---and the article has been recreated at least half-a-dozen times. If this is not deleted and salted, we will be having a similar discussion in another 6 months or so. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• If the article is recreated verbatim, G4 will suffice nicely. When another article is written in six months (given the pattern, it's not an issue of "if" anymore), WP can handle another examination or debate on it. Salting will just cause the next article creator to use a different diambiguator next time. hateless 01:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per Kellen, but do not salt. I could imagine this being a dab page for various communities that commonly refer to themselves as scene (e.g. warez is a distinctly different scene). But this article doesn't have any of that info, and assumes the only scene is the one from a certain music genre. VG ☎ 02:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

  I've added the above to Scene (community). No point in having a separate Scene (youth subculture). VG ☎ 02:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Scene (youth subculture) (not a duplicate vote, my first !vote is for a different article). "scene" is just a synonym for the word "subculture". Searching google scholar, I see a paper on the Journal of Youth Studies [1], a US Department of Justice report using them as synonyms[2], a book about goths says how the term "scene" is sometimes preferred to "subculture" but it's going to use subculture because it represents the goth shared identity better [3], this study on punk makes a convoluted argument on how "scene" is more useful than "subculture" for illustrating some complicated argument [4], the first page on this list treats them as synonyms[5]. First ten pages of a Google Books search don't appear to give any book about a youth suculture called "Scene" [6] --Enric Naval (talk) 23:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Scene (youth subculture); its existence is noted in the Sydney Morning Herald; it could be expanded. Please note that even if you have not heard of something, that does not mean it does not exist. Whatever404 (talk) 02:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

It would need alot more than one very poor source considering there isn't the slightest mention anywhere else. --neon white talk 10:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete first one - non-notable neologism, that isn't even true. If i asked a student if they were "scene", it would mean the sort of young gay who spends all his free time in gay bars. (Szene in German too). It is an old slang term which changes it's meaning depending on who says it. Having no knowledge of history or society does not mean wikipedia can redefine words. -Yobmod (talk) 11:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yobmod is right. There needs to be a single disambig page about (the) scene, possibly with some redirects. The current state of affairs is pretty crazy. VG ☎ 13:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

WAIT! This page now has pictures and adequate references. Not from urbandictionary but from a diverse range of websites. Most of the original research has now been removed Scene is definitely a subculture (somewhere between punk and heavy metal). I used to be one many years ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick19thind (talk • contribs) 20:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. Sorry, Nick, but the content you added is not nearly enough to save the article. The photographs really tell us nothing. I looked at all the sources you added, and not a one of them mentions the word "scene"---to be fair, the last "reference" is not in English, so I have no idea what it said. A link to Hot Topic is certainly not adequate and absolutepunk.net seems to be a message board, so it is not acceptable either. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 22:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Because it has other names. I have added other sources (several music-related and an encyclopedia article). The subculture even has its own website. What more proof do you need?

Those sources are of very bad quality :( Nationmaster is a mirror of wikipedia, so it's as if you were linking a wikipedia article. The scene website has two pages, apparently made by only one person (actually, it seems to be a skinned blog). That they claim to be the official website that not mean that they are such a thing. Other not acceptable source are a Yahoo! answers page, for example. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

It's still nothing more than a personal essay. I call get a blog! --neon white talk 09:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• Point of order I have cut the Gordian knot here and moved all comments regarding The Scene (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to the talk page. This AfD is becoming completely unmanageable as is. If users desire for The Scene to be deleted, kindly open another AfD. Cheers, HiDrNick! 16:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep I've trimmed the article to a stub, removing ALL original research, and leaving what is reliably sourced. Hopefully, now that the OR problem is fixed, the article won't be deleted, and we can go about looking for sources. --Pwnage8 (talk) 16:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. Even with all that rubbish cleared out, we still are left with a vague article about a nonnotable "subculture" (by all rights, it does not merit being described as such) that is too new for there to be any reliable sources. The newspaper article is all but useless, and the other source is about straight-edge, not "scene." In my opinion, nothing has changed, and it is still deserving of deletion. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment That's crap. Nothing is "too new" to be covered in reliable sources. The newspaper article is proof of that. "Useless" would be your opinion, but here on Wikipedia, that's called a reliable source. The fact that it gets covered in reliable sources means that it's notable, and that it can stay. If the article is not as detailed as you'd like it to be, that's because it's a stub! Don't demolish the house before it's even been built! --Pwnage8 (talk) 16:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Almost a case of countering systemic bias. Anyone who has teenage kids in many western countries will know this phrase, but - surprise surprise - it doesn't have a huge amount of coverage in "reliable sources" (and it's difficult to search for, as well). Still, here some random articles (the first one is notable, as it's from a BBC series that has an episode about various teen subcultures, and 'scene' is one of them) - BBC, "Scene kids will destroy democracy" (heh!), [7], UK Newspaper. Black Kite 19:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)