Talk:Decopunk

Perhaps this should be merged with Steampunk, at least until it becomes a genre in its own right. 2.121.249.90 (talk) 02:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed AfD.

Dieselpunk cannot get its own article and is currently relegated to a subcategory of Cyberpunk. Decopunk would be even less notable than Dieselpunk and should either be deleted or at the very least merged into the ever increasing suffix-punk dross. ~ Brother William (talk) 08:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You argument would appear to be using WP as a source to indicate non-notability. That fails on three counts:

WP is never WP:RS
Lack of something on WP doesn't indicate non-notability
That article was on Dieselpunk, not Decopunk.

This isn't even to begin on the issue that Dieselpunk, an article with more than 60 citations, was deleted for being unreferenced_(sic) by an admin who was threatening blocks to those who disagreed with him.

That said though, I can't see adequate notability for an independent article on decopunk. This should be a redirect to a section within dieselpunk. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm for creating a new subsection here with the same title and content as this article, and redirecting this article to that section. -Scochran4 (talk) 20:58, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the process of creating a new article for dieselpunk and was going to fold this into it, but in the meantime I concur: lack of notability. --Jonnybgoode44 (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and created the redirect to Cyberpunk/Decopunk.Marshall Stax (talk) 04:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]