Talk:Belfield FM

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Belfield FM. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120219221918/http://www.collegetribune.ie:80/index.php/2012/02/possibility-of-belfield-fm-society-being-formed/ to http://www.collegetribune.ie/index.php/2012/02/possibility-of-belfield-fm-society-being-formed/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:34, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Belfield FM logo.png

Conflicts of Interest and NOTWEBHOST
In a series of edits last year, and to address a number of concerns raised by multiple editors (including during a related AfD discussion), much of the problematic content in this article was removed. Including most of the promotional, "Wikipedia as an extension of the subject's own website", apparent COI/vanity, inappropriate broadcast schedule, unqualified editorial, apparent nonsense/vandalism and generally uncited and editorial content.

Earlier today, much of it was restored. Including the apparent hoax/vandalism about the subject's "sister station" being the International Space Station, the editorial about the subject's output being "wide" "varied" and "popular", the promotional tone taken in describing the "great success" in being nominated for awards, the uncited and out-of-scope lists of programs and broadcast times, and uncited "list of every staff-member ever". In restoring this content, many of the references (added to the article since) were removed.

I have reverted these edits. For the reasons above. And those noted in the relevant edit summary.

If there is justification for restoring this content, and removing the relevant references, then I am happy to discuss that rationale here. I would otherwise remind involved editors of the policies against editing Wikipedia in their own interest or considering Wikipedia to be a form of free webhost for their own organisation.

Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 17:29, 7 May 2020 (UTC)