Talk:Drew and Mike

Article deletion discussion
I don't think this page should be deleted, I just have never posted to Wikipedia before and have not figured everything out yet.


 * Strong Oppose Delete - 16 years in a major market... This show has a lot of history and absolutely should not be deleted.  Adamgs82 (talk) 03:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose Delete - This is the number one morning radio show in a major US Metropolitan area. I find the lack of notability claims absurd.  I agree the article needs a lot of work but I do not believe that is grounds for deletion.  Every so often the ratings come out for Radio in the Free Press and Next time I see them I will post as a source.  I agree with tagging the crap out of this article to indicate it needs work and is perhaps not neutral but it doesn't need to go.  Dachande (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Johnbarleycornmustdie (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose Delete - Drew and Mike would be considered non-notable only to people living outside Greater Detroit. If Wikipedia deletes this page for being 'non-notable', then they should also delete all content on the Detroit Red Wings, General Motors, and Kid Rock.


 * Oppose Delete - The show may fail to meet notability requirements (I only found 2 results searching Google News for "drew and mike wrif", and both were from the Detroit Free Press). But with a moderate amount of work this could be made into a decent article.  I would like to know if there are other articles about similar shows/personalities.  Does all Wikipedia content need to be 'nationally notable' to qualify for an article? ie: no regional/local content? Dp76764 (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete The show indeed fails notability requirements. I find the argument "Drew and Mike would be considered non-notable only to people living outside Greater Detroit" very amusing. With all due respect, but "people living outside Greater Detroit" only means the rest of the PLANET. A breakfast show on a local radio station doesn't belong in an encyclopedia in my opinion. Channel &reg;   20:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose Delete - So would Arthur Penhallow need deletion if he wasn't in The Upside of Anger? GenericPeter (talk) 23:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose Delete - I specifically came looking here for more info on this radio show, after having known about their prank phone call skits for a long time. And I'm not a local. -- Sy / (talk) 13:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Any number of concerns
Why are these people notable? Where are the reliable sources about any of the information in this article? Why does this not conform to our policies on neutral point of view? Seriously... this needs immediate attention. Captainktainer * Talk 12:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I would argue that they're notable because they have a prominent, popular, and occasionally controversial show on a 30,000 watt radio station. However, this article needs a fair amount of rewriting, which I would be happy to do soon. Apart from NPOV issues, the article presumes a fair amount of existing familiarity with the show. What does it mean to "dedicate a BIIITCH"? Who is Delbert Harris? What is Shrine of the Little Flower and how is it relevant to the show? I'm asking rhetorically; I know the answers to all these questions. But if I didn't, this article wouldn't help me. --Guyinypsi 16:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Baseball Records?
I looked in the VA Tech Media Guide, and it lists Andy Aldrich as a captain in the 1980 and 1981 season. However, he is NOWHERE to be found as far as individual records go, as stated in this article.....

So, put a fact template on it and maybe even move it into a discussion section here. -- Sy / (talk) 13:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Drewandmike.jpg
Image:Drewandmike.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

AFD results
I'm willing to go along with closure of the AFD despite the fact that the discussion does not meet WP:SNOW (which is not a policy BTW). Now, let's take all that energy that was put into opposing deletion of this article into improving it, especially the references.--Rtphokie (talk) 11:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It was a steep uphill battle, but we've managed to transform the miracle into reality. Great work everyone!  Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 21:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)