Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beat Radio (2nd nomination)


 * 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 __EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  23:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Beat Radio
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This page has spent 8 years without any citations, and 13 years since last being nominated for AfD. Clearly nobody is interested in maintaining this page. I would have PROD but the AfD means I can't PROD. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 21:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Minnesota.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment There are a number of potential sources linked from their webpage here which doesn't address the interest but could indicate notability. I have not gone through them yet. LizardJr8 (talk) 02:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep The materials on the Beat site, which are quite well preserved (a good thing) and one or two of which would qualify as SIGCOV, plus some coverage in Radio & Records:, suggest a keep. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 23:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I am sure the station operator is, in 2023, cringing at having used the phrase "the Rosa Parks of radio" to describe his station back in 1997. Flip Format (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:GNG with sources presented above and in the article. They're reliable enough, with some in-depth IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: It looks like a short-lived pirate radio station which subsequently supplied a very temporary sustaining service to a bankrupt broadcaster pending the transfer of its licenses and then became a monthly show on a community radio station. Normally, I'd say delete, but it looks like it generated mainstream news coverage at the time, the article has been well researched, and so is good enough to pass WP:GNG in my view. Flip Format (talk) 17:56, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Easily passes WP:GNG Lightburst (talk) 19:46, 27 April 2023 (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.