Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DXRR (Nasipit)


 * 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. While more participation here would have been ideal, the nomination basis of the radio station being a probable hoax has been sufficiently countered by respondents herein. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 00:36, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

DXRR (Nasipit)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Probable hoax for the following reasons:


 * For a radio station claiming to be established in 2001, it is not listed in the NSO 2010 Yearbook in the area of Agusan del Norte. (see Table 20.7a, under "XIII - Caraga")
 * The callsign DXRR-FM is assigned to an FM station operating on 101.1 MHz in the area of Davao (NSO 2010 Yearbook, Table 20.7a, under "XI - Davao Region").
 * The claimed frequency, 93.5 MHz, is assigned to a different radio station, DXPN (NSO 2010 Yearbook).

-- Bluemask (talk) 03:16, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't think it's a hoax unless it's a very elaborate one as DXRR on 93.5 Mhz is mentioned in a significant number of Google search results including at least one from a government agency. Confusion over frequency allocation may be due to it's former name and mixed designation as "DXRR-FM Hot FM" or "Hot FM 93.5 Nasipit" - see Hot FM (Philippine radio network). Article is unreferenced but that can be fixed. Satisfies broadcast notability based on its established broadcast history regardless of the change in name. See also this FM Transmitter Map. Philg88 ♦talk 06:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  Philg88 ♦talk 05:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


 * None of the nominator's concerns prove that this is a hoax, as such, particularly given the other evidence that it does exist. The nominator's evidence might prove that maybe this station is being erroneously listed under the wrong call sign by a couple of sources, but that's about it — the claim that it's an outright "hoax" is completely unsupported by the evidence at hand. Keep and flag for cleanup. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Philg88 ♦talk 05:10, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:57, 21 June 2014 (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.