Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KCAL-FM


 * 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 Speedy Keep (non admin closure). Consensus forms that licensed radio stations satisfy notability criteria by virtue, and comments in good faith on the desirability for users (in particular, new users) to contribute in a manner where they can avoid being misconstrued as a Single-purpose account that edits in a manner not aligned with neutrality. WilliamH (talk) 11:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

KCAL-FM

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable radio station, article does not meet Wikipedia requirements and standards to remain on site — Robbin' hood (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep. Meets notability criteria for radio broadcasters, and as automatically noted above, the nominator appears to have no Wikipedia edits beyond this AFD. 23skidoo (talk) 06:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Of course it's notable and licensed, but it needs more sourcing and less boosterism. I don't want to seem suspicious of the nominator's intentions, but they might be working at another station in the market or a fan of the station, and have been peturbed that their article about their morning show is being put up for deletion. Why do I feel like I'm watching WKRP and WPIG's mascots about to fight in a bathroom stall?  Nate  • ( chatter ) 06:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 08:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 08:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I will WP:assume good faith on this nom. WCAL is a satisfactory stub that could use (yet another) copyedit for a more neutral tone. A Google News search shows sustained non-trivial interest by 3rd-party WP:reliable sources, satisfying general WP:notability guidelines for inclusion. Besides, the established editor consensus is licensed radio stations are inherently notable. WCAL needs a WP:neutral point of view expansion, not deletion. • Gene93k (talk) 08:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep there's no reason for the nom as it is clearly notable. --Deadly&forall;ssassin(talk) 09:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep the nom has to be joking. JuJube (talk) 09:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep The text there leaves much to be desired, admittedly. --moof (talk) 10:43, 12 April 2008 (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.