Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KOXY


 * 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   merge to Occidental College. L Faraone  03:12, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

KOXY

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:V and Notability (organizations and companies), "If no independent, third-party, reliable sources can be found on a topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it." GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  02:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lack of available sources to establish notability per WP:BROADCAST. I was only able to find a couple of articles that make passing references to the radio station. - MrX 02:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed, the basic rule for notability of radio stations is that they are or were formally licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. This article's description makes it quite clear that this was, at best, either a closed circuit or Part 15 station — confirmed by the fact that queries at both FMQ and RecNet come up empty — and therefore, it would need impeccable sourcing to actually be considered notable. Accordingly, this station is certainly entitled to be mentioned in our article on Occidental College, but may not have its own independent article as things currently stand. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 04:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep: Disruptive nomination, user has slapped a tag of some sort on over a dozen pages I created or significantly edited in the page p  b  p  05:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete' KOXY was created in 16:24, 22 August 2010‎ and is still a one sentence stub. No proof of notability in the article..   D r e a m Focus  06:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:TOOLITTLE, WP:NOEFFORT. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:35, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Those links aren't valid. This isn't a short article, this is no article at all, just two sentences, with no references or proof of notability at all.  It is a student run radio station that didn't do well enough to stay on the radio, they switching to just a webcast instead.  No reason to believe it is notable.    D r e a m Focus  16:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, they're very valid, because "created X time ago and is still a one-sentence stub" is exactly the argument to avoid they describe. No reference? WP:SOFIXIT. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:21, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * "It is a student run radio station that didn't do well enough to stay on the radio". The radio station was on the radio for 40 years, then has been streaming for the last four.  That is why it is not currently listed in an FCC list of radio stations; it most likely was in the past. Remember that notability guidelines afford the same amount of notability to a defunct enterprise as to an extant one.  p  b  p  16:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Why not put that in the article then? Why create something an article then abandon it?  And don't a lot of schools have radio stations?  What makes this one notable?   D r e a m Focus  16:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Um, it did say that it originally operated at the frequency 104.7 in the article. It's said that ever since it was created.  I'm desregarding your "Create, then abandon" comment as not germane  p  b  p  16:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There are methods by which a radio station can operate without FCC approval — stations which broadcast by closed circuit, carrier current or under Part 15 rules do not require FCC approval, and can operate in that manner for decades without ever going to the FCC for permission; a station only requires FCC approval if it wants to serve a broadcast range larger than a few individual buildings. You're also wrong in that FMQ does not only turn up currently operating stations — if a station has ever had an FCC license, then a complete licensing history (right up to and including the surrender of its former license) will turn up in an FMQ query whether the station still exists today or not. But KOXY turns up nothing, which means that it has never been a licensed operation, but was a closed circuit, carrier current or Part 15 station instead. And again, the core criterion for radio stations to get an automatic presumption of notability on Wikipedia is not "this station exists"; it's "this station is licensed by the FCC". An unlicensed station could still qualify for an article if you can add really solid sources to get past the lack of an FCC license (we have numerous very good articles about pirate radio stations, for example), but it is not entitled to keep an unreferenced article just because you assert its existence. Bearcat (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Unable to find much on this station in any real way except it was an annoyance to the college and eventually went web-only, where it seems to be reduced to the level of a hobby club. We're not looking at one of the classic college stations here, but just a basic common carrier station which is little regarded, even on its own campus. The claims of a bad-faith nomination I don't see; I probably would have nominated this article or redirected to the college myself after finding a lack of sources.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 06:32, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge to Occidental College, adding the information there. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, per lack of notability and Bearcat's sound analysis. I have found a few sources that trivially mention the radio (eg ), but none of them discusses the station in an meaningful way. Cavarrone (talk) 07:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete Merge - Sources are scant; other than 1 article I found, the remaining articles provided by Google News archive only have passing mentions, and Google Books doesn't appear to yield any results. Here's an article from the Occidental Weekly, Occidental College's student newspaper: Long tuned-out, KOXY makes a comeback. However, this may be considered by some to be somewhat of a primary source, and it appears to be the only one available online that offers significant coverage. Perhaps a merge to Occidental College may be in order? Northamerica1000(talk) 11:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * After consideration, changed my !vote above to merge. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete or redirect to the College's page. There is not enough substantial coverage in reliable sources to pass the GNG, and this does not pass the guideline for radio networks that would otherwise make it notable.--Yaksar (let's chat) 11:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Do not delete content but require nominator to merge into Occidental College in any event: Based on nominators initiation of Talk:Chili_burger, he's got his panties in a wad over some surely inane dispute with article creator Purplebackpack89.  If someone is going to waste our time with WP:POINTY bullshit, that incivility should be punished severely, by making the editor improve Wikipedia articles.--Milowent • hasspoken  12:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a completely inappropriate comment for an AfD discsussion. Please consider redacting the personal attack. - MrX 13:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The real civility problem on wikipedia is people who purposely attack other editors through masquerades of claimed legitimate editing. I won't redact, but i will refrain from further comment on this AfD, I've said my piece, and I think it was a fair response to uncivil behavior by the nominator.--Milowent • hasspoken  15:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete or Merge: KOXY is not listed in the FCC database, so the station does not meet GNG nor does it enjoy the established notability under WP:BROADCAST. I would not have any qualms about it being merged into the Occidental College page. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 14:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * See comment about broadcast history above. If I read WP:BROADCAST and WP:GNG correctly, it need not currently be active to be notable  p  b  p  16:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you find some references? I mean, that would save the article, right? Also, why not just make it a section within the college? It would serve visitors best that way. Just leave a redirect behind. After all, it's two sentences with no refs. Why do you want it to stand alone anyway? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:02, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, its a tough case for notability here. As Bearcat and Nate allude to above, low-power stations like this are rarely notable (even if it was still broadcasting AM or FM) see also Articles for deletion/WCKS (college radio).--Milowent • hasspoken  17:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is a lot to see there. There were also follow-up comments here.  Unscintillating (talk) 03:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Occidental College. This is just a campus radio station, not a general-broadcast station. I added a sentence about it to the Occidental article, so the "merge" has already been done. --MelanieN (talk) 17:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Campus radio stations are entitled to the same presumption of notability as general broadcast stations are (i.e. FCC license = in.) What makes this one nn is not the word "campus", but the word "unlicensed". Bearcat (talk) 21:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge to Occidental College better than creating another radio station stub. Dejakh ~ User talk:Dejakh•Special:Contributions/Dejakh 20:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - per ,,. In addition, radio stations receive coverage from the Federal Communications Commission. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:17, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Unlicensed radio stations such as this one do not receive FCC coverage. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've asked this question once and didn't get a clear answer, so I'm asking again: what happens if somebody could prove it had an FCC license at sometime in the past? p  b  p  19:37, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Then that would certainly help, although finding evidence would be the tricky part. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:55, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If it did have an FCC license in the past and you could prove that through properly reliable sources, then the article could almost certainly be kept given that improvement. However, given that its existence doesn't, in and of itself, prove that it was licensed (see what I said above about closed circuit, carrier current and Part 15 stations), the onus would be on you (or somebody else) to find proper references which explicitly clarify that it was licensed, not on anybody else to automatically presume that it was licensed in the absence of references which explicitly clarify that it wasn't. Bearcat (talk) 00:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * More source coverage Google books. College radio became commonplace in the 1960s when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) began issuing class D licenses for ten-watt radio stations. Also see Low-power_broadcasting. I do not see any reliable sources supporting the claim that KOXY was/is a pirate radio station. The U.S. government strictly regulates airwave transmission and is not going to allow a college to send radio communications over the U.S. airwaves without control, even in the 1960s. While the source material already found supports having KOXY as a stand alone article, it is reasonable to presume that the station received additional source coverage through government documents and those can be used to expand the article as well. -- Jreferee (talk) 10:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * None of the sources you have found support a stand alone for KOXY. Yes, it was cited in relation to a lawsuit raised by Jason Antebi against the college, but none of the sources have KOXY as main topic nor discuss the station in an meaningful way. Cavarrone (talk) 10:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Nobody said that KOXY was a pirate radio station. There are numerous ways in which a station can be unlicensed without being a pirate, such as closed circuit, carrier current or Part 15 — the numerous pirate radio articles that we do have serve as examples of how unlicensed stations can still garner sufficient coverage to be notable in spite of the lack of a real license, but they're not the only kind of unlicensed station that exists. A station broadcasting via closed circuit, carrier current or Part 15 is not in violation of any US government rules — in fact, it's in full accordance with them, as the rules do allow for that kind of thing — and thus existing without an FCC license does not make it a "pirate". And again, it's not enough to infer that a station must have been licensed just because you don't understand how it could exist if it wasn't — a station can exist without having an FCC license and many others here do understand how that works. In fact, at least two of the sources in your own Google Books search (i.e. the Broadcasting Yearbook directories) explicitly list KOXY in a dedicated section for unlicensed "campus-limited" (i.e. closed circuit, carrier current or Part 15) stations, separate from the listings for conventionally FCC-licensed campus stations that broadcasted to a whole city or region — so thanks, you've actually proven that the station wasn't an FCC-licensed operation. (It is generally a good idea, a propos of nothing, to actually read some of your sources first!) Again, the lack of an FCC license does not make KOXY a pirate — it makes it closed circuit, carrier current or Part 15. But the lack of an FCC license does mean you have to meet a much higher burden of sourcing to get past the license issue than a conventional FCC-licensed station would have to meet — and not sources about the college which merely mention KOXY in passing, or broadcast directories which simply list it, but sources which are actually, substantially about KOXY itself. The sources in your Google Books search are certainly enough to support mentioning KOXY in the main article on the college — but they are not sufficient to support a separate article about KOXY, because KOXY is just mentioned within them and is not their subject. Bearcat (talk) 18:50, 2 April 2013 (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.