Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vicki Leekx

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. Tone 12:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vicki Leekx

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

Per

WP:NALBUMS, mixtapes are not generally notable, unless they have received significant coverage. Other than music sites reporting that it was going to be/has been released, I cannot find any significant coverage of this free online mix. ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep - information is verifiably cited by reliable sources. I think it just needs expansion. Also, the same amount of coverage has kept other mixtape articles, including her first.Lifebonzza (talk) 13:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Well... I created this page because I knew the mixtape would create a buzz on the Internet. The "problem" is that it was announced/appeared on Christmas/New Year's Eve, so the media coverage was not as important as it would have been if it was in another moment of the year. Wait, and you will see. Official reviews are already appearing, by the way (e.g. Sputnik [1]). Clif (talk) 15:17, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - All it needs is a good edit and time for the information to be fleshed out. Demos Demon 19:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - 2010 was a pretty crazy year, not just in music but in life events as well. The title is an obvious play on the site "wikileaks". Part of history I say, keep it. - Kobe101 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kobe101 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Hard to predict these things, but I'd consider the coverage significant over the past couple of days. I say give it some time to be fleshed out first. OzW (talk) 01:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:48, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Well, Pitchfork just made an extensive review of it. Even got a decent score: (Pitchfork:[2]). I thik this must be included in the general page as a ref; I will try to do it. muertecaramelo (talk)

8:24, 8 January 2011 (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.