Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Sinatra: Undeniable (2nd nomination)


 * 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. While consensus is to delete, this AfD is closed without prejudice against someone creating a redirect. The lack of consensus of a redirect target does not seem worth relisting when there is a clear delete consensus. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:28, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Young Sinatra: Undeniable
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems to fail WP:NALBUM  Oxon Alex    - talk  07:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.   Oxon Alex    - talk  07:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:24, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 12:35, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


 * delete per rationale of first deletion. Nothing appears to have changed. Mangoe (talk) 15:03, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know how this works, but deletion will be detrimental to informing about full discography AB365 (talk) 2:53, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * That's just bad luck, I'm afraid – Wikipedia only keeps music-related articles based on whether they pass the criteria at WP:GNG and WP:NALBUM. As you state yourself in your last edit summary on the article, you have struggled to find sources. The Datpiff hosting site only shows the album exists to download, without any indication that it's notable, Genius is user-submitted work, and the Sputnikmusic review is from a user, not a member of staff. So the only source which would count as reliable per WP:RS is the Hot New Hip Hop website, and even there it's only a couple of brief paragraphs introducing a download link. Richard3120 (talk) 17:32, 18 October 2019 (UTC)


 *  Keep or merge - Do not delete this useful search term. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:48, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge or redirect maybe, but you can't "keep" just on the basis that the search term might be useful. Can you show how this passes WP:NALBUM? Richard3120 (talk) 17:32, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/ talk ¦ contribs \ 18:25, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 *  Reply - I am not adamant about keeping the article, hence the reason I said "Keep or merge". --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:30, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * That doesn't really answer my question, but never mind... Richard3120 (talk) 16:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)


 *  reply - I can not show that it passes WP:NALBUM. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:58, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete sources cited are not reliable. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 05:19, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Logic or Logic discography as this could be a viable search term and it would make sense for any information on this mixtape to be housed at the article for the artist or the related discography list. Aoba47 (talk) 03:19, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


 * 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.