After a bold restore of Wikipedia‘s dieselpunk page this summer, it got deleted again last month, speedily and without discussion, supposedly because it reposted “the exact material that was deemed unsuitable” in previous deletion reviews.
This wasn’t the case. The version that was put together by Valoem in July included many more references, including a number that should have qualified as “reliable,” than earlier incarnations of the page which yours truly helped write in 2008.
There is still discussion about this unfortunate deletion process but I’m not holding my breath. I understand that Wikipedia cannot accept pages about every possible subject; that they should stand some test of credibility and relevance but it’s preposterous that SteamPunk Magazine can have a page because it once referred to in a Newsweek article (a “reliable source”) whereas dieselpunk, with literally thousands of online hits and scores of artists and authors who describe their work as such, isn’t deemed relevant enough to deserve its own entry.
Incredibly, there is a page for something called decopunk which is the exact same thing as dieselpunk!