Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gamelan gong gede

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 speedy keep. There is clear consensus that this subject is notable and articles for deletion is not cleanup. (non-admin closure) TBr and ley ^{(what's up)} 23:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gamelan gong gede

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No references. Grammatical failures (e.g., lack of subject for the first sentence of the body), etc.

External links in the body of the text, violating several policies. (I didn't bother with checking for copyright notices at the links of recordings....)

Gamelan is one of the most studied forms of ethnomusicology, and there's no reason for an unsourced article. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I make a comment in a discussion at WP:VPP about Kiefer Wolfowitz's disruptive editing, and then he "coincidentally" happens to first prod, then (after the prod notice was removed) nominate an article I started for deletion rather than fix (or even tag) some minor problems with it? This is utterly pathetic battling. — Hex (❝?!❞) 17:38, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please retract your AGF violation. I often discuss gamelan, as a search of my user name would show---assuming the search facilities here are easier to use than the demanding search-engine on DGM....

You have a lot of bad articles, from what I can see, but Wikipedia is filled with shit, so I don't AfD the others. However, Galeman is important, and this article should be in user-space until it would have been accepted by my 5th grade teacher. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, sources seem to exist, not that KW bothered to look for them in his haste to ram an elbow in Hex's ribs. — foxj 17:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You have noticed the grammatical problems? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I'm aware, grammatical problems are not reasons to delete an article. — foxj 17:59, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In English, sentences have subjects. Did you look at the first sentence-fragment of the body? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there seem to be plenty of sources. A reliable source is Review of 'Ritual Music from Bali III: The Gong Gede from Sulahan by Danker H. Schaareman; Barni Palm; Monika Nadolny' in Ethnomusicology, Vol 34, No 1, Winter 1990. (Actually that's 2 sources, the recording and the review). A book is Triguna: A Hindu-Balinese Philosophy for Gamelan Gong Gede Music by Made Mantle Hood, Lit Verlag, 2011. An album is Gamelan Gong Gede of Batur Temple, King Record Co Ltd, 1992. There appear to be sources in Bahasa Indonesia (language) also. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep; deletion is not cleanup. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:25, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Chiswick Chap has identified reliable sources. Bad grammar and invalid citations are surmountable problems; WP:SURMOUNTABLE policy recommends editing and deletion only as a last resort. A related policy, WP:NOTFORCLEANUP, indicates that AfD is not for cleanup of articles on notable topics. Both of these policies recommend that the article be kept. Mark viking (talk) 21:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are citing user essays which are not even guidelines. They are certainly not policy. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep AfD is not cleanup. Jucchan (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - references are present (albeit not really presented as references, fact is, they're still there), and nothing else is a valid rationale for deletion in the nominator's comments. Trout for apparent bad faith nom as well. Lukeno94 (talk) 22:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry. I had confused WP with an encyclopedia with pillars about content. I can see how my nomination seemed like bad faith to you. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, I saw the bit at the village pump, and it's clear you came here with a negative agenda. You're using AfD as a tool to force cleanup, and if you are as interested in gamelan as you claim, you wouldn't have brought it here, but you'd sort it out yourself... That, to me, is bad faith. Hence the trout. Lukeno94 (talk) 22:43, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Hex did a nifty bit of canvassing at the village pump.
Lukeno, I have contributed to the gamelan article using this account, as you can check. You might like to see what a reliable source and citation look like. In my experience, AfD does result in clean-up. Shit is removed, or a stub is created. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:51, 21 January 2013 (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.