Talk:Indie hip hop

This article was nominated for deletion on 4 June 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to Underground hip hop.

you keep reverting me, let's discuss this

It seems to me like this entire article is original research. What is the definition based on?--Urthogie 21:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this should be just a redirect. It does seem like original research. Can this be attributed to anyone? Berserkerz Crit 21:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

People use the phrase, but without concrete definition. When they do use it with a concrete definition, they're referring to hip hop not made on major labels, or made without a label at all(underground hip hop). Hence, I completely agree it should be a redirect.--Urthogie 21:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've popped the {{original research}} tag on the article, in order to highlight the possible need to revise it. I believe this is preferable to removing the entire contents of the article. --Oscarthecat 21:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you understand what I'm saying: Not only is it orignial research, it is not capable of not being original research. Tagging it suggests it can be fixed, which it can't.--Urthogie 21:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Urthogie - I suggested on your talk page that you propose this article for deletion, rather than redirecting. The page has quite bit of edit history, it's been around for over 2 months. Or let's have the debate here instead. I'm of the opinion this needs talking about before undoing 2 months of editing. --Oscarthecat 22:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well instead of talking about talking, could you raise your objections here, perhaps explain how a page about an undefined term with a made up definition could be anything but original research?--Urthogie 22:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, do you object to the term "indie hip hop" itself? Or to the content of the article itself? The term seems widely used to me. So if it's a valid term, is it valid to have an article? --Oscarthecat 22:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge that its used in the music media. My point isn't that its a neologism, but rather that it has no fixed meaning whatsoever. It is impossible to write an article without a defniition, and it is impossible to give a definition for this article because no reliable source offers one. You can't write an article about a term with no accepted meaning, can you? I mean you can, but isn't it doomed, by its very nature to always be original research?--Urthogie 22:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking at Indie rock and wondered if we could develop Indie hip hop into something along these lines. The definition there, of Indie rock itself, seems ok. What do you think? --Oscarthecat 06:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indie rock is not a comparible term to "indie hip hop" because, unlike the latter, it is defined by several sources(for example,: [1]) in the music media. Although these sources differ slightly in their definitions offered, they are still reliable sources offering definitions. The term "indie hip hop" is used without any regard to a concrete meaning whatsover, and therefore, unlike "indie rock", can not be an article that isn't original research.--Urthogie 13:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reset Indent. Yes the problem I have with this article too is the lack of reliable, credible, and attributable sources. =/ Without those, this article is doomed. Berserkerz Crit 08:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article has minor problem only

The phrase "Indie hip hop" doesn't need an independently verifiable definition. It is understood what independent music is. It is understood what hip hop music is. Both have articles. This is a comparable situation to (for example), an article about "arctic mammals" or "modern Greek authors" or any other subject for which it might be useful to state a few things germane to a subject as defined by an adjective/noun coupling. As with any article, what this article says should be sourced. This lack of sourcing, however, is not justification for a redirect nor deletion. (A bit of history: This article was created because the Alternative hip hop article was a mess. It was necessary to explain that "alternative hip hop" was hip hop that was either underground or indie.) --House of Scandal 13:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hi, Currently I am taking a Communications class in College that focuses only on Wikipedia and our final project is to contribute to an existing Wikipedia article with little information. I was wondering, could I add some sections and edit this article? I wanted to highlight the impact that the internet has had on Wikipedia. I also wanted to expand on the history of Independent Rap. I am really excited about the potential of this article and what I could contribute to it. Let me know if you have any reservations about me working on this article. Thanks. Sjeanbap (talk) 13:18, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete

Y Merger complete. All information from this article has been merged into Underground hip hop, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indie hip hop. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]