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. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:27, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mixtape Messiah 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

• Mixtape Messiah 3

Two mixtapes that do not appear to pass either general notability guidelines or the specific guidelines of WP:MUSIC. The reviews on MM2 appear to be almost exclusively from non-reliable sources and I find the same sorts of non-reliable sourcing when searching for MM3, mostly download sites it appears. I would have boldly redirected them either to the artist or a discography but I had no doubt that such action would have been reverted by fans. Otto4711 (talk) 19:05, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No sources for either. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:19, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. coccyx bloccyx_(toccyx) 19:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the artist or discography. If the fans revert it, we can revert back. If it continues, someone can protect the redirect. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:26, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Both The mixtapes have received critical coverage, including this review of Mixtape Messiah 3 from the rather reliable source known as The New York Times. These sources and reviews are already in the articles, but are not integrated into the text, and additional sources from Billboard and the Houston Chronicle, among others, are also available to support the claims of notability. The claims of no sources seem to be rather unreliable. Given the ample reliable and verifiable sources, the Wikipedia:Notability standard is satisfied. Alansohn (talk) 21:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keepish. And that Times review isn't short either. Can't believe I missed it. The wordsofsouth link doesn't look too reliable. Any other options to use instead for that one? - Mgm|^(talk) 00:53, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Both mixtapes are widely acclaimed, and much too notable for deletion. Lhw1 (talk) 00:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. The NYT article demonstrates some notability.--Michig (talk) 08:38, 1 November 2008 (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.