I'm afraid I don't see the "deeply deeply flawed" nature of WP:MUSIC. In my experience, it's an incredibly useful tool. It's also made a lot of AfD discussions less contentious for WP newbies. Instead of what seems like dozens of people passing judgement on your band, it's people pointing to a set of guidelines which doesn't allow for your band's inclusion.
The guidelines may be pop and Western oriented, but that's largely a response to the specific problems which WP has had, namely with garage bands from Western countries. I don't see this as a indication of the flawed nature of these guidelines. As geni noted, when we are overrun with vanity articles from music students in opera school promoting themselves, we can add more specific sub-guidelines regarding opera. Is there really a problem with regards to non-pop or non-Western music? The guidelines are vague and inclusive enough that anything remotely notable can make it through provided one is willing enough to provide a solid source or two, which should be required anyway under WP:Cite your sources.
As far as this new template goes, I find it appalling that people find it appropriate to openly declare their contempt for consensus in such a manner, and I find it no better than that speedy deleted template which declared an intention to violate image copyrights. In my experience, a decent source or two is all that's needed to save the shakiest article. I really don't see evidence of widespread loss of articles on notable topics, just an occasional anomaly or two like Elf Only Inn that gets deleted. I'm sorry if you find afd or vfu onerous and offensive, but let's let the system work before you storm the Bastille, eh? When the Cyrus Farivar article was on Afd, Snowspinner openly declared his intention to override consensus and that he'd insure the article was kept regardless. It turned out there was no consensus for delete, so Snowspinner's unilateral declaration was completely unnecessary, but now what was a normal run of the mill deletion vote looks like an illegitimate result.