Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Love Music

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 of the debate was DELETE.

Final tally at closing: 1 Keep; 5 Delete; 4 discarded anons/socks. Owen× ☎ 21:35, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I Love Music

This article about a message board has been tagged for speedy deletion multiple times. Its content was recently replaced with an unrelated article about trees, which was then vandalized Bill 18:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - I like the idea of having an ILM entry, it has been infuential. However, with its large user base, there are tons of trolls, many of which will (and have) taken great joy in defacing the page. Excessivereason 15:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - content is non-notable, verging on the nonsensical. --Whouk (talk) 18:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Velvetsmog 19:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Keep- Results 1 - 10 of about 342,000 for ilxor. (0.08 seconds), it's been cited and discussed in newspapers like the New York Times and The Guardian, enough articles on her actually mention discussions on it (see the entries for MIA and Prolapse), I would venture as far as to say only someone who doesn't understand Wikipedia would request a deletion for this entry.

• • Comment this vote for keep is from the same ip address that replaced the article with one about pine trees. Must not think its too important.Bill 22:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete this article, and write one about The O'Jays' 1975 #1 R&B hit single. --FuriousFreddy 23:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep because despite the vandalism, it's an influential board on the net music scene.
• Keep. Influential music board. rodii 04:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Keep or Delete, it's up to you, but if you're going to keep, then for god's sake get some better content than that in - none of the names cited are "much-loved internet personalities" they are music writers, apart from the last-named, who is a homophobic nuisance poster on the board (who is also probably responsible for putting the article up in the first place).

Excuse me, but I am that "homophobic nuisance poster". I didn't put up the article in the first place (it was Tuomas, don't you know) and I am an internet personality. Just the other day, someone walked up to me and said "I KNOW YOU FROM THE INTERNET. TO BE SPECIFIC, I LOVE MUSIC!" -- Love, Esteban Buttez

I'm sure the folks at Wikipdeia are fascinated by this, "Esteban".

Whatever that means. Also, I hope you know that I have several gay and lesbian friends. One of them works at Officeworks, and he gets me discounts there now and again. He's such a nice guy. -- Cheers Bigears! Love, Esteban Buttez!

• Keep. The content of the article could be improved, but ILM/ILX is of cultural significance.
• Delete. As per the above exchange, any entry about "I Love Music" is likely to be persistently changed back and forth for "humorous" purposes by board trolls, such as "Esteban", above. I'm a long-term regular poster on "I Love Music", it's a fun place, but to be honest I really have my doubts about its "cultural significance", despite its appearing in newspapers, and some of the other regulars being published authors etc.

Is Wiki reserved for items of "cultural significance" now?

• Re-write I would say keep, but only if more details are added & it is made more unbiased Computerjoe 18:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

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.