User talk:Grrtch

Garage punk

OK, I,ve got bored now with arguing this one. I have restored the original two-line article which I deleted, and when another admin deletes it you can argue with them.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further to your amended edit, let me say, with no intention of giving offence, that you are slightly missing the point. My deletion of the very short article on garage punk, which i have in any case as I said restored, is not a comment on the genre; it is a comment on the article. The genre may well be of supreme significance, and I would have no argument if you were to say so; the point is that the article does not express this significance. Your message to me shows the impotance and significance of this genre; the article does not. And deletion decisions are made on the basis of content only.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. As you will appreciate, I did not whittle it, and merely reacted to the page as presented.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am totally certain that this page will be deleted again unless it it is significantly modified to demonstrate adherence to WP:MUSIC and WP:NN. I shall not delete it again, so you must take it up with whichever admin (if any) does so.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back at the article, it has been monumentally magnified since I deleted it. That's excellent. I have no emotional antipathy to it, (whatever the first author suggested) and if it is now a proper and reasonable article, that's fine by me. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I say, I have no personal, emotional or political reason to remove the article. I am just doing my best to keep the encyclopedia encyclopedic. If the article can be made sustainable, then great. No problem.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 23:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been restored to the version exactly prior to it's original delete. I wasn't trying to be mean or anything, and I wish you the best in working on the article. Jmlk 1 7 03:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite true; it was two lines when it went, and it's now two pages. Had it been as complete as this, I would never contemplate delting it; nor would it have been {{speedy}} tagged which, of course, it originally was. But hopefully all friends now.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in

Hey buddy, just checking in to see how garage punk is coming along. I think it looks much better, but I have a piece of advice: add it into the punk template at the bottom of the page. That will help create more exposure, and guide other fans to the article, hopefully improving it! Jmlk 1 7 22:16, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly it looks much better, and as it is now I would not dream of deleting it. Of course no hard feelings. Let me say once again; when an article is deleted from wikipedia by an admin, this is a judgement on the article, not on the topic. Whether garage punk is itself notable, as it appears that it is, is wholly beside the point. The ARTICLE must demonstrate this. The one I deleted did not. The present one does. And that's fine. Whether I know anything about modern music, which you correctly observe I do not, is not relevant. Admin deletion work is a judgement issue on the text, not the subject. But hey, ok, all friends here.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 01:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]