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. Sandstein 09:28, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Organic Narratives (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)

Request at OTRS ticket:2017070110003254 The reason for deletion is this ‘mixtape’ doesn’t exist anywhere on the internet. The artist is not notable (article has been deleted) and is no longer active. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 15:59, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:53, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:53, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The mixtape did exist, it was reviewed by at least three independent sources. It passes WP:NALBUM#1. The artist's own article was deleted in April after being nominated (see AfD:Lostkeyz) by @Doronlosky97: who did not declare a possible WP:COI and has the same name as the artist. I missed that AfD and would have argued against it. That same editor tried to have this article deleted in May and again a few days ago but used the failed 1st nomination (see contribs). The artist may no longer be performing, his article may no longer exist, it may not be relevant to his current career but that does not mean that the work, itself, was not notable. This article should be kept.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:38, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Policy Comment - Since the rapper has no article of his own (see AfD:Lostkeyz) , this album should be speedy deleted (WP:A9) unless there is evidence that anybody else notable was involved. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:37, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply Not quite, the cited policy also states, "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines." As indicated above, notability in this article is established per WP:ALBUM. The discussion at AfD:Lostkeyz was thin and unfortunately I missed it: that article should not have been deleted.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - You have said that the album passes WP:NALBUM #1 because it was reviewed by some notable sources. But you have not (at least in this discussion) provided any detail as to how exactly those sources confer notability. My assessment is that the sources in the article, including those from Acclaim and Howl & Echoes, are little more than introductions to the album's existence with some faint praise from a writer who probably listened to it once. I can find nothing beyond these in my own search. These brief media mentions might be enough for a "Weak Keep" vote for an album by a more notable artist. But since this rapper was already found to be non-notable in his own AfD, then so are his releases. Therefore my vote is Delete but I would not be opposed to re-creating the rapper's article when and if he becomes more notable as a musician. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Album is self-published/self-released; the in-depth sources are more about the artist than the album and if they were not sufficient to establish notability for the artist they are not useful for the album either; the other sources seem to be local press, blogish or essentially trivial. There is no indication that it has charted. In total nothing convinces me that this work is notable per WP:NALBUM. In addition I think it appropriate to, by analogy to WP:NBOOK, consider a self-released work to have a strong presumption of being non-notable. Being the work of a red-linked artist is the final nail in the coffin. Jbh ^Talk 01:04, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The lack of evidence that this entered any national charts is a huge problem. The fact that this article, if created today, would probably fall foul of WP:A9 is another concern. Wikipedia isn't meant to be a list of trivialities and non-notable things. Exemplo347 (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.