Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shiny Shoe Music

Shiny Shoe Music

This term is a neologism according to the article itself, which writes:

The term Shiny Shoe Music was first used by MoChassid, a Jewish music blog. Other names for it commonly refer to "Boro Park Rock," "DosPop," "Hemishe Freilachs," and "Muzica Chasidi" (Hebrew phrase for "Hasidic Music.")

Following that link shows that the term was invented in 2004 by a blogger; there is no reason to think that it has wide-spread use. Google has "about 674" results, the first of which is WP. The fact that other editors have edited the page means merely that they know about this kind of music (as I do), not that they refer to it by this name. (But I hope to inform all such editors of this nomination.)—msh210℠ 19:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have so informed.—msh210℠ 06:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom, unless a better name can be found...in which case, rename Hasidic music. Tomer ^talk 19:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep. Fact check. Following the link, I learned that the blogger was happy to use the term in 2004 because he felt it was inspired, not that he made it up himself. In fact he specifically disclaims making it up, saying that it was made up by another Yerushalmi musician. The Google hits seem diverse enough to support the idea that it is in use by a lot of people, even if it's a "neologism" (not sure if that term even applies to music, whose styles are constantly evolving) Reswobslc 03:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Fact re-check: He says his musician friend invented "shiny black shoe music", not "shiny shoe music", which seems to be his own invention. Most of the Google hits are blog entries (at a glance: I haven't checked carefully), which would seem to imply that the term is quite new.—msh210℠ 20:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I actually have no problem moving per Tomer ^talk 19:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC), I guess, but have no idea what to move to. As the article states, the genre is called "Hasidic music" (in Hebrew) in Israel, and I've heard the term "Hasidic music" (in English) too, and ~~I suspect that that's a better title than the current one~~, but don't know if that's good enough either.—msh210℠ 20:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So, my recommendation then becomes to move the article to Hasidic music and if someone comes along later and says that article should include other types of Hasidic music, we can figure out at that point whether to further disambiguate...or if, perhaps, by that time, "Shiny Shoe Music" or some other term is more applicable to this particular genre. Tomer ^talk 06:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Come to think of it, "Hasidic music" would be too ambiguous: in fact it sounds like it's referring to music of Chasidim rather than to the stuff now discussed at Shiny Shoe Music. So maybe moving thither is not such a good idea.—msh210℠ 06:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Which was exactly my point...That said, however, just because you or I think it sounds ambiguous is insufficient grounds to not put it there...essentially, refusing to do so, esp. since you even say right out, above, that you've heard it referred to by that name, becomes a backwards violation of WP:NOR. All that would be required to avoid confusion is to state plainly what's being discussed in the article lead--that is, after all, the lead's purpose. As I said above, if Çasidi music eventually begins to refer to other things as well, or if you're really opposed to putting it at Chasidic music, write an article about chasidic music [it need only be a stub, to begin with], and mention the subject of the current Shiny Shoe Music, complete with a link to "this" article, and move it from Shiny Shoe Music to Hasidic music (style) or whatever. Tomer ^talk 21:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, TigerShark 22:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't really think that was entirely necessary--I'm pretty sure consensus against outright deletion has already been reached. What remains is to actually figure out what to rename it. Tomer ^talk 23:01, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Per TShilo12's suggestion, I hereby withdraw my nomination for deletion in favor of moving the article. (Note also that this should not be viewed as a request by author for deletion of this AFD page, as a record of this discussion is needed.)—msh210℠ 00:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]