Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DWSA


 * 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. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 03:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

DWSA

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

NN orgs (radio or television stations) that do not indicate significant importance over other radio stations of the same kind. See also Articles for deletion/DXET. :| TelCo NaSp  Ve :|  05:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete: Broadcast stations have traditionally been been presumed notable on Wikipedia if they have at least the main type of broadcast license (i.e. not low-power or temporary) for their country and originate their own local programming rather than simply being a rebroadcaster. Backing up that presumption is easy for U.S./Canadian stations; but I've found that, often, Philippine stations don't even have enough data to establish that they have had original histories/programming separate from another station, let alone WP:GNG and Notability (broadcasting).  Maybe the status of the stations are given more coverage in the Philippine print media; but online, you often find sparse and contradictory information about whether stations even exist.  I had a heck of a time sorting out Articles for deletion/DXDM, for example.  Since Philippine stations tend to group in networks pretty often, I'd say that, like with my opinion on DXDM (which turned out to be a no-consensus close), Philippine stations should be deleted/redirected unless there is at least WP:RS evidence that they originate(d) their own programming or had a separate history.  There seems to be some (unsourced) claim of separate programming for DZBF and separate history on DWKI, but they seem to be WP:OR. --Closeapple (talk) 07:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 07:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 07:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I haven't checked whether these stations are notable or not, but I must point out that "significant importance over other radio stations of the same kind" is not a requirement for notability. This is an encyclopedia, not the Guinness Book of Records, so our inclusion criteria are not relative in this way. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Weak Keep Stations have presumed notability, I would prefer a merge to deletion. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as government-licensed broadcast radio and television stations have been found generally notable and "importance over other radio stations of the same kind" is not a criteria for deletion. Wikipedia is not a competition. - Dravecky (talk) 10:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Articles for deletion/Common outcomes, which provides that "licensed radio and TV stations are generally kept as notable if they broadcast over the air and originate at least a portion of their programming schedule in their own studios". --Bsherr (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2010 (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.