Deletion of Nardcore

Comment: u|Trackinfo}}, please remember to assume good faith. It is not disingenuous to clean up an article before nominating for AfD. It helps clarify what the AfD is actually about, helps determine whether an article is suitable for AfD, and is very often done before nominating articles for AfD. The content I removed was either unsourced, poorly sourced, or was almost entirely to do with bands and band members that are associated with the genre, not the genre itself. It was a large portion of the article content, but not the "meat" of the article. Regarding my "rush to push this AfD", I reverted your first two additions because you had removed the AfD tags, as you appeared to have accidentally removed them. I ''did'' perform  and found only references to the same half-dozen bands, but no discussion that was remotely comprehensive of the genre itself in reliable sources. The references you've added haven't changed that assessment. Regarding the sources offered in the article at this point
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: Delete. With the exception of http://www.rnrinmyblood.com/rock-n-roll-encyclopedia-j-n.html this source, which seems to list ''everything'', the references provided are just a |bombardment of "...the genre known as Nardcore" or "...including Nardcore artists like..." I searched a dozen or so other GNews hits, and while you can definitively say that the genre exists, there's nothing in the way of significant coverage ''about'' the genre. There are no sources like "here's what you need to know about nardcore". A proliferation of interviews, primary sources, and name drops do not denote significance or notability; it just means something exists. If you can find some sources that actually talk ''about'' nardcore I'm willing to reconsider my opinion
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Citation overkill (WP:BOMBARD)

Comment: The NOM started this AfD in a disingenuous fashion by first deleting the meat of the content. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nardcore&diff=818355562&oldid=811031854  They obviously did not do a  because I was able to start adding sources before they had even created the AfD.  https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nardcore&diff=818362730&oldid=818362314 Here in their rush to push this AfD, they reverted and thus removed my first two additions of sources.  I don't know what other sources I will find to add in the future or how it will modify the content of the article, but I am already finding enough  to justify the existence of this genre.  That was the sole basis for the NOM.  They have failed miserably to prove the absence of sources.  I am finding the opposite.  I suggest they withdraw the NOM at this time
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:GNG)

Comment: to Punk rock in California. There's some poor reasoning on both sides above. Tertiary sources are prima facie evidence of secondary source coverage; if an encyclopedia has an article about a topic, it's because it's noteworthy enough to end up in an encyclopedia (and so, in virtually all cases, most likely noteworthy enough to end up here). That said...the encyclopedia manqué discussed here does not, as far as I can tell, meet  guidelines, and I took the liberty of junking some of the other links that definitely aren't up to snuff. At least a couple of the sources proffered, especially the OC Weekly and VC Star sources, clearly establish that there was a hardcore scene around Oxnard that came to carry its own designation, and that merits mention in a paragraph within an existing article on hardcore. It also establishes the utility of having something parked at Nardcore for user convenience - if not an article, then a redirect. Deletion is ''not'' a good option on the table. What I'm not seeing from these sources is much indication that this designation referred to a distinct style or close-knit scene that engendered its own critical or rock-journalistic attention as such; it just seems to refer to hardcore from Oxnard. That deserves some mention within the context of SoCal punk, but I'm not seeing enough on which to hang a separate article here. That said, there should be '''no prejudice to re-creation''' if more robust sources materialize
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)