Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D100 Radio (New York City)


 * 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 delete. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:28, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

D100 Radio (New York City)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article PRODDED as failing GNG no sources added after removal of PROD that could point towards notability. Delete as failing WP:GNG and WP:NMEDIA Domdeparis (talk) 08:22, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 08:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 08:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 08:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment Article added sources noting towards notability. 12:57, 27 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnAndrrston (talk • contribs)
 * The sources added do not help to prove notability at all. 1 is a blog post on the profile of an anonymous member on a music web site and the other isn't even about the subject of the article. I think this looks like clutching at straws. Domdeparis (talk) 13:53, 27 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator. Internet searches do not demonstrate in-depth coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. Citobun (talk) 13:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Removing my vote now that this is a "bundled AFD" for two completely unrelated subjects. I object to anything being deleted under this flawed process. The two articles should be nominated for deletion separately. Citobun (talk) 13:55, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Reinstated vote as the bundled AFD has been rescinded. Citobun (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Here is another reliable source. Should this be added? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5-best-internet-radio-stations-every-music-fan-must_us_59297e5be4b07d848fdc040d
 * Huffpost contributors are notoriously not reliable sources they are often marketing companies disguised as bloggers and journalists. The contributor who wrote this is realtively honest as she describes herself as "I am an entrepreneur and works with small businesses to promote them online." so no this is not a reliable source. Domdeparis (talk) 13:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I completely object to this. What is not reliable with this article?


 * I object to this deletion, however I do agree with the HuffPost contributor page. This may be a marketing company.
 * OBJECT. Sammyjohn2810123


 * Bundled AFD I am nominating the following page for the same reasons
 * Domdeparis (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I object to this. The subjects are completely unrelated. Citobun (talk) 13:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * My bad I should have look at it closer but I believe the 2 articles are candidates for deletion. I retire the bundle. Domdeparis (talk) 14:00, 27 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep I also object. D100 is one of the best in the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AshleySanzie49302 (talk • contribs) 14:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC) — AshleySanzie49302 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep I object as well. There also is no real reason why D100 is up for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveJohnson1 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)  — SteveJohnson1 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep OBJECT. Sammyjohn2810123 — Sammyjohn2810123 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep I agree with all of you. D100 should stay. TomStephens7 —Preceding undated comment added 14:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)  — TomStephens7 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I have relisted the swarm of WP:SPA keep !votes that may be the result of a WP:SOCKPUPPET farm or are at least WP:MEATPUPPETS as 2 of the accounts have been created with the sole purpose to !vote in this discussion. Please be advised that this serves no purpose whatsoever as the !votes will not be taken into account because this is not a vote but a discussion based on guidelines and policy. Please read WP:NOTVOTE before wasting your time in making a comment. Domdeparis (talk) 14:32, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're correct. We're actually normal people that created Wiki accounts for this sole purpose. We do not want to see D100 Radio get deleted. We do not care about these rules. Also, I think you're just doing this to get attention.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomStephens7 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi if you really want the page to stay please read WP:GNG and WP:RS and look for reliable sources and then add them to the page because unfortunately just saying that you want it to stay is not enough. Domdeparis (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * So the dozens of fans coming who oppose will not count? BTW they have announced it over the air. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomStephens7 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, buddy. You’ve messed with the wrong fans. I would delete this whole witch hunt now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JinYang1892 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

KMF (talk) 01:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You know what guys it's great to be a fan (a wrong or a right one for that matter) and it's great to think that your favourite radio station deserves its own Wikipedia page but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and all articles need to prove the notability of their subject and unfortunately this one doesn't. What is not great is to think that just because the radio station asks its fans to vote that it will change anything, it will have the opposite effect. If you really want you opinions to weigh in the balance learn a little about general notability guidelines and what is meant by a reliable source (I have added links to help you in the above discussion), look for the sources and add them to this discussion and the page. Domdeparis (talk) 16:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, we will search, how long can this discussion be open? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JinYang1892 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Seven days minimum Bearcat (talk) 02:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  WC Quidditch  &#9742;   &#9998;  01:10, 28 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Internet radio stations do not get an automatic presumption of notability per WP:NMEDIA just for existing. They can certainly still get articles if they can be sourced over WP:GNG, but that's not what the sourcing here is doing: four of the six references are directory entries, and both of the the other two are glancing namechecks of its existence in articles that aren't about it on a user-generated content platform. Which means that all of exactly zero of the sources here count for anything at all toward properly demonstrating notability. Bearcat (talk) 02:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. -- HighKing ++ 10:53, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete As already mentioned Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMEDIA. Did a search for them and isn’t a lot of articles on them NZ Footballs Conscience  (talk) 08:18, 3 July 2017 (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.