Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nu Gospel

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. Any redirect would be a separate editorial decision. For posterity, this is the cited BBC source:  Sandstein  21:17, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Nu Gospel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This is a neologism that one non-notable band has coined to describe the style of their music. It is not in general use. I note that the same editor has attempted to create an article about that same band "Chos3n" and had the draft rejected three times; they then created it directly in Article namespace and it is in AfD. It looks to me like they are trying to boot-strap these articles off one another. Gronk Oz (talk) 17:49, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment - Small correction: Chos3n (band) is currently a PROD candidate, rather than AFD. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:52, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Delete. No references. The article admits that the term is a neologism, so it's unlikely that any can be found. Maproom (talk) 17:59, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - No references. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:00, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Comment - JohnCD pointed out that there is a compilation album of "Nu Gospel" listed on iTunes so there is some precedent for it being used outside of that one band.--Gronk Oz (talk) 18:08, 27 November 2015 (UTC) Ref: here on iTunes
• delete WP:NEO no standard application of this terminology nor any specifics that identify such a genre not even any evidence of any widespread use of the term. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:28, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Delete Following up on Gronk Oz's comment, I checked to see whether this term is used much in the news or books. I found no coverage of the term using Google Books, but some stuff did come up using the news from Rolling Stone (), Consequence of Sound , The Telegraph (), and two French publications, Telerama (, and La De Peche (). In context, however, I agree with TheRedPenOfDoom that there lacks a standard application of the term, nor is there very much to draw from this coverage to define or generally discuss the the genre. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:44, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Redirect/merge to Gospel music, per TRPOD and WP:NEO; beyond the sources analysed by I JethroBT (the same that I found), the BBC source in the article is also evidence that the neologism may be gaining some minimal currency. If sources can be found, this could be a section of the main article until – if ever – it becomes clear that a separate page is needed; without sources, there's nothing to merge, so a redirect is all that's needed. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:38, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

  Redirect to Gospel music, per Justlettersandnumbers; I've struck my above recommendation to delete. Not sure there is anything to merge based on the current state of the article. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 22:53, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

• Delete Per reasons given above. Safiel (talk) 04:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
• Comment Note that article creator was blocked indefinitely on a username/spam block. Safiel (talk) 04:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
• Redirect to Gospel music - I noticed that the creator was blocked indefinitely, but only because the account name implies promotional use (the band name mentioned earlier was used) so I don't believe that precludes the editor from creating an account that is not promotional or (better option) request an unblock and a name change at the same time. With that said, when that editor created the articles I checked and I found a number of sources that use the term, but only one RS in the first two Google results. The others were short articles. I suspect that if this term does catch on, we will need to revisit the subject. The article is on my name space and I will watch for recreation. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:34, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

• According to the block notice here, the primary reason was "because this account has been used only for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to Wikipedia's content policy." The account name was only a secondary reason.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment We are Chos3n was set up not to advertise, only because all Chos3n social media log on was that username. There was no warning that this would be considered as advertising (in fact i'm still trying to figure it out given that Chos3n is my band name not Chos3n. I digress. . . Nu Gospel is yes a coined term for Urban Contemporary Gospel music that crosses over to the secular market. A bridge between Gospel and Urban contemporary, a mid genre if you will. This does exist. maybe not on your 'hilltop' but it does. If Chos3n recognises itself as a Nu Gospel artist, and Nu Gospel is a recognised (albeit gathering momentum genre) you will find your first link between artist 'chos3n' and Nu Gospel' which was already linked in the first edit of my upload. 81.140.67.187 (talk) 14:01, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Chos3n

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.