Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scrapyard (mixtape)

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 keep‎. ✗plicit 12:05, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scrapyard (mixtape)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass WP:NALBUMS. Half of the sources are from Twitter while the rest are seemingly from student newspapers, which do not contribute to notability. The only reliable source from WP:A/S used here is HotNewHipHop, but an album needs at least 3-4 reliable sources from A/S to pass for notability. Locust member (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:08, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: Sources 13 and 15 are a RS, an album review. KTLA is non-trivial coverage. The rest are student publications, but we have some critical notice, weak but it's there. Oaktree b (talk) 15:10, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: OP is correct that student newspapers are the main sources cited. Doesn't pass for notability. Zzendaya (talk) 20:32, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Agree with Oaktree b, it has just enough sources to get over notability threshold. I know college newspapers aren't the most reliable option, but this ones are opinion write ups about music, and they don't claim something really wild. In a way they are the best source of opinion for Quadeca as one of his target demographic, thus are better qualified to speak on the music, than oldies of Rolling Stone, etc. LastJabberwocky (talk) 10:03, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per Oaktree b and LastJebberwocky B3251_(talk) 00:14, 21 April 2025 (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.