Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Community media


 * 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. WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) TBrandley (what's up) 18:52, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Community media

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Current article has WP:ESSAY and WP:OR issues. To avoid overlap, the topic is best covered by the existing community radio, community television and community journalism articles. 1292simon (talk) 11:06, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree. This article must be kept, because "Community Media", specifically, is an established term in EU and European Commission bodies; there are also directives and at least one resolution of the European Parliament specifically for Community Media. There are also a lot of established "Community Media" organizations all over Europe, and there are also international bodies. I will proceed updating the Reference and external links immediately. 83.168.9.146 (talk) 14:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * keep I have added sources (Bibliography and External Links) specifically on Community Media: UNESCO publications (UNESCO has a Chair specifically on Community Media); Resolutions and declarations from EU and EC bodies; 2-3 Books for Community Media; a couple of Community Media organizations, including a pan-european one (CMFE). The fact that "Community Media" is a term acknowledged and endorsed by important bodies like UNESCO, the EU and EC and the specific use of the term, based on this I support the opinion that this article meets notability criteria to be kept in Wikipedia, it should not be deleted, but to remain there (with the existing notices about standards) until it is written in a way that meets Wikipedia standards. 83.168.9.146 (talk) 16:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MJ94 (talk) 00:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Keep. The article is poorly written and under-referenced, but the subject is notable and is distinct from community journalism. Majoreditor (talk) 02:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 13:11, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Topic is the subject of books by reputable publishers. Notable. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - While the article is in need of cleanup and better organization, entire books have been written about this topic. Passes WP:N. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:02, 22 January 2013 (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.