Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gonzo Opera

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 delete. The consensus is that this term is not used widely enough as reported at reliable sources to show that it meets the criteria for inclusion. I would like to comment MelanieN for her work on the article - I am sure that the result of this AfD will not prevent her continuing her sterling work on articles! PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 04:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gonzo Opera

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

Contested PROD. Seems to be a non-notable neologism coined by Daniel Steven Crafts to describe his own work. Not seeing anything in Google that supports this being a recognised genre or sub-genre. The term is used from time to time as a description but doesn't seem to have gained much traction. To save the article we would need at least one reference, independent of Crafts, discussing this as a genre or movement. DanielRigal (talk) 22:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, not a notable term/genre. Also possible that the creator of the article may have a conflict of interest and is trying to promote the term. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:56, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The author seems to think Crafts created this form, but in fact the term "gonzo opera" has been in use since at least 1993 [1]. Someone needs to rewrite this article to reflect the fact that it has been done multiple times and that Crafts/Wheeler did not create the genre. --MelanieN (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, there, I expanded the article so that it now lists multiple examples of the genre with references. Please take another look. --MelanieN (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still no reference for it being a recognised genre other than just a descriptive term that some people have chosen to use and which one person promotes as a genre. If the first sentence can't be referenced properly then that is fatal to the article's chances. If we can't prove it is a genre or sub-genre and we can't find a consensus as to its definition then it fails verifiability. --DanielRigal (talk) 01:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this. "A couple of people have used the term independently of each other to describe a couple of unrelated operas" does not a "concept" make. I've had to remove a few of your references, MelanieN - "Gonzo Opera" in reference to the Gonzales Cantata is a play on his name, not a statement that it belongs to the genre. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 13 February 2011 (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.