Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Round 4: The City Is Mine

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. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Round 4: The City Is Mine[edit]

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

Mixtape from a rapper that doesn't have an article on here. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 03:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lil Wayne has expressed interest in signing this artist to his Young Money Entertainment record label and if he does this mixtape would very quickly become this artists most touted work (simply as it is his latest) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freshman5000 (talk • contribs) 04:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- And your source for this is where? (And how do you know this would become the artist's most touted work?) Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 04:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - it was in an interview with Amanda Diva he was asked if he "...had any plans to extend the roster of Young Money" he replied "we already are with Cory Gunz and I'm thinking about this AZ guy (Yung)MillzZ..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freshman5000 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - When the performing artist himself isn't considered notable enough for a WP article, his individual recordings certainly can't be. And even if Young MillzZ had been deemed notable, this mixtape hasn't had time to become notable itself, since it's set to be released today.--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Freshman5000's rationale is speculative per WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL.--v/r - T P 22:22, 23 June 2011 (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.