Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KISN (Portland)


 * 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. per WP:SNOW; merge discussion (if any) should take place on talk page (non-admin closure) NW ( Talk ) 18:49, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

KISN (Portland)

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

LouriePieterse (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have requested that the nominator provide a deletion rationale. KuyaBriBri Talk 18:49, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep in current stub vesrion. Original version was a huge copyvio, and licensed radio stations are considered notable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Where was the copyvio from, by the way? I couldn't find it with a (brief) search on Google. --Closeapple (talk) 06:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added the request because the layout is poor and none of the facts are cited. LouriePieterse (talk) 18:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed the first problem, and the second should be easy to fix. I don't know much about radio articles though. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

amateurs or licensed real estate professionals who are well known in their communities? If you just want to make a directory that is fine but this makes notability a bit irrelevant. It was notable as a kid that I could listen to radio Moscow on short wave and you could argue that AM stations may have automatic national interest but even those that do internet broadcasts may not have more than local appeal. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 19:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment : This is purely site owner's discretion but what about licensed radio


 * Keep - as per Ten Pound Hammer. ---kilbad (talk) 19:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep in light of nominator providing requested rationale for deletion. "Cleanup"/"unreferenced" is not grounds for deletion. TenPoundHammer has satisfactorily cleaned up the article by stubbing it. KuyaBriBri Talk 19:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is not temporary, consensus states licensed broadcast, yadda yadda riffic (talk) 20:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Prior practice has been to keep all articles about FCC licensed commercial broadcasting stations which ever transmitted over the air and which originated some of their own programming. I added some refs. The station was top rated in its market in the late 1950's and was in national news because of alleged political partisanship before the license was lost, so would clearly be notable in any event. (Note: We have no article about the Salt Lake City station which used those call letters between the loss of license by the Portland station  and the present license in Montana.) Edison (talk) 20:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:34, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep There will be no trouble expanding the article with pre-1970 sources. —EncMstr (talk) 23:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Per standard radio station notability. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 23:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - The nom has not provided valid reasons for deleting. --Oakshade (talk) 03:39, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to current licensee, KTRO (AM), and merge details in this article with that one. I know I'm going against the grain, but the KTRO article is extremely thin on history and it could use the KISN history within its body.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 05:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a different station than KTRO. Different ownership, management, format.  Just because the current licensee KTRO inherited the physical apparatus of KISN doesn't mean they're the same.  KMET (defunct) (now KTWV) is another example.  "Thin on history" is only a blind assumption.  A quick g-archives search alone brings up many secondary sources.  --Oakshade (talk) 15:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to KTRO (AM): since Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington are next to each other, it appears that the FCC intended KTRO to be successor to that 910 kHz allocation. Usually new licenses on a dead frequency are treated as successors on Wikipedia even if they didn't transfer the license, right? If it stays unmerged, it should at least be KISN (Portland, Oregon).
 * Keep Radio stations are generally notable. Sebwite (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep as years of consensus holds that all FCC licensed broadcast radio stations are notable and notability is not temporary. In any case, I'd also make a motion for a procedural keep since the deletion rationale is insufficient: AfD is not cleanup. - Dravecky (talk) 06:54, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, especially after Dravecky's cleanup with great sources. tedder (talk) 06:55, 12 June 2009 (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.