The result was keep. Krimpet ( talk) 03:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article presumes all of the listed bands should be tied together because of the gender of their members - this is stigmatizing, as many of these bands are barely similar, also associating classical female composers of the past to garage rock.. what is the correlation, apart from the fact they're female? The existence of this article implies that female bands deviate from the "normal" band, that is, all-male. If anything, it overcredits them - if they are relevant bands, cite them in "normal" music pages. It is proposed for deletion for WP:OCAT Betina 00:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Please read our Wikipedia:No original research policy. We don't get to make our own novel interpretations of things simply because we disagree with the interpretations that the sources have. And that includes not having articles merely because we personally don't like the fact that quite a few writers have chosen to document the concept of all-female bands and include a wide range of bands in that category. In a conflict between your unsupported personal opinion, as a pseudonymous Wikipedia editor, and an actual source, the source wins. In this case, we have quite a few sources. (At least one of them was written by an assistant professor at UCLA, incidentally.) Your argument that the sources are "subjective" when your entirely subjective personal opinion, with no sources to back it up, is the sole basis for your own argument is clearly a double standard, also.
Human knowledge is unfair, uneven, and imperfect. If you here to set it to rights, such as by not discussing all-female bands because it unfair that there isn't a parallel discussion of all-male bands, you are here for the wrong reasons. This is an encyclopaedia. We aren't here to change human knowledge and change what the sources say. We are here to document human knowledge and report what the sources say. If you want to document all-male bands to the same degree that all-female bands are documented, or dispute what all of the sources variously say about all-female bands, or just generally go on a crusade to change human knowledge, go and write a book of your own. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Uncle G 17:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I cannot make my point any stronger, and if you still insist that I am choosing to ignore the knowledge of the source, I understand that you take Wikipedia a simple search engine that reproduces the organization of every single of its sources without discrimination - however confusing, conflicting and inaccurate that setting may be. Oh, and organization and content are absolutely the same thing. Betina 12:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Krimpet ( talk) 03:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC) reply
This article presumes all of the listed bands should be tied together because of the gender of their members - this is stigmatizing, as many of these bands are barely similar, also associating classical female composers of the past to garage rock.. what is the correlation, apart from the fact they're female? The existence of this article implies that female bands deviate from the "normal" band, that is, all-male. If anything, it overcredits them - if they are relevant bands, cite them in "normal" music pages. It is proposed for deletion for WP:OCAT Betina 00:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Please read our Wikipedia:No original research policy. We don't get to make our own novel interpretations of things simply because we disagree with the interpretations that the sources have. And that includes not having articles merely because we personally don't like the fact that quite a few writers have chosen to document the concept of all-female bands and include a wide range of bands in that category. In a conflict between your unsupported personal opinion, as a pseudonymous Wikipedia editor, and an actual source, the source wins. In this case, we have quite a few sources. (At least one of them was written by an assistant professor at UCLA, incidentally.) Your argument that the sources are "subjective" when your entirely subjective personal opinion, with no sources to back it up, is the sole basis for your own argument is clearly a double standard, also.
Human knowledge is unfair, uneven, and imperfect. If you here to set it to rights, such as by not discussing all-female bands because it unfair that there isn't a parallel discussion of all-male bands, you are here for the wrong reasons. This is an encyclopaedia. We aren't here to change human knowledge and change what the sources say. We are here to document human knowledge and report what the sources say. If you want to document all-male bands to the same degree that all-female bands are documented, or dispute what all of the sources variously say about all-female bands, or just generally go on a crusade to change human knowledge, go and write a book of your own. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Uncle G 17:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC) reply
I cannot make my point any stronger, and if you still insist that I am choosing to ignore the knowledge of the source, I understand that you take Wikipedia a simple search engine that reproduces the organization of every single of its sources without discrimination - however confusing, conflicting and inaccurate that setting may be. Oh, and organization and content are absolutely the same thing. Betina 12:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC) reply