Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of radio stations in Stockton


 * 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. Information from this article was evidently used already to fill in information at List of radio stations in California, so this is no longer a candidate for deletion for GFDL reasons. However, there is no consensus to keep this as a stand-alone list and plenty of arguments advanced for deletion or merger. With respect to incorporating this material into any future articles on Media in Stockton, such material can of course be obtained from the article's history as long as the merger is properly noted per Help:Merge. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

List of radio stations in Stockton

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

Article is a list of radio stations in a particular arbitrarily-defined radio station market. List of radio stations in California already covers this particular area and is both current and of the currently accepted form (United States radio lists are on the state level). This is one of only two lists covering United States radio stations in this manner. JPG-GR (talk) 00:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. per nomination, already exists in the California list. Renee (talk) 02:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 04:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, already covered. In event of being kept/merged, needs renaming as Stockton -> Stockton, California. Black Kite 12:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per precedent and nomination. - Dravecky (talk) 14:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Far from being "arbitrarily-defined", media markets such as these are well-defined by Arbitron (see list of markets here and see how Stockton is the #79 market here). Radio markets are the industry standard for geographical categorization of radio stations. This list has been recently updated from two reliable sources: RadioStationWorld page for Stockton/Tracy/Lodi and an Inside Radio station search (type Stockton into the City/Market to get an equivalent list). List of radio stations in California does not incoprorate all of the information from this list, instead, the statewide list is now simply a wikified FCC database dump which does not have Owner and Format information updated, and omits Branding entirely (many stations are known more by their branding than by their callsign, yet this important information is omitted from the statewide lists). The statewide list contains 800+ radio stations and is 62KB long, and such a long sortable table causes performance issues in some browsers, as well as being unhelpful for the reader and/or editor seeking information about stations within their own market area, which is generally the set of stations to which such a typical reader or editor will be able to tune and listen. The only reason so few of these market lists remain is that the nominator recently prod-ded many other lists I was working on, and I had not objected in time. (I am often away from editing Wikipedia for extended periods of time due to other priorities in my life.) When I requested undeletion, the deleting administrator did not restore the articles as is usual practice for a contested PROD, but userfied the content instead. Other similar lists (including statewide lists which were organized by market area), which had existed in the past for years, were also redirected a few months back, also by the nominator, and replaced by wikified FCC database dumps. The FCC does not track radio market areas, but many other reliable sources do. Market-area lists such as this one conform to our content policies of verifiability based on reliable sources, no original research, and neutral point of view, and conform to notability guidelines and list guidelines, so there is no policy-based reason to delete these lists. Redundancy is not a valid reason for deletion, and similar to how categories, lists, and navigational templates are encouraged to co-exist and be used to update each other in synergy, the market lists should be considered to complement the statewide lists and market templates, and each should be used to update the others. DHowell (talk) 18:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Stations can be part of more than one market or none at all, making this an inefficient way to sort stations. The shift in the state radio lists from the horrendous inconsistencies and disarray that existed only occurred after discussion at WP:WPRS. Moreover, as each Arbitron market already has its own template, a template which each included article contains (or will eventually), these lists are wholly redundant. JPG-GR (talk) 07:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * While stations may serve or have listeners in more than one market, every station serving a market has a primary market to which it can be assigned, and is assigned, according to the sources (RadioStationWorld and Inside Radio) that I cited. And that some stations might not belong to any market is certainly no reason to delete lists of stations which do serve a market. And sorting by market is only "inefficient" in your opinion. I happen to think having to sort and search through a list of 800+ radio stations, to find the 5 to 20 percent or so that I can actually hear from any given location in the state, is rather inefficient, especially on slower computers which may take a while to sort that table. Then having to know the name of every city in the region which has a radio station to find them all. I may not be the only one who thinks these large statewide lists are unwieldly, because so far very few have bothered to update the Owner and Format fields in List of radio stations in California, or List of radio stations in Texas for that matter, both large unwieldly lists. The "horrendous inconsistencies and disarry that existed" before, were SIX statewide lists for each state, which were in widely differing formats, and largely became unecessary because of the new sortable wikitable feature. There was consensus in the discussions at WT:WPRS to replace most of these with sortable wikitables, because the lists sorted by city, owner, format, and frequency could all be sorted in one sortable table. But there was no consenus on what to do about market areas, and you solely made the decision to keep them out of the new tables. I asked that the separate market area lists remain, and you appeared to concede to leave the California market lists alone so that I could work on them. Now, less than 5 months later, you've proposed and nominated them for deletion! I know I am to assume good faith, but I can't help but wonder if I am being "punished" for having other priorities and not working on them in these last few months, or if I would have wasted my time had I actually worked hard on them and completed them, only to still have them nominated for deletion? Furthermore, as WP:CLS says, templates are not redundant to lists and can should be used complement each other. The templates are a basic navigational aid, while the lists give a more comprehensive overview of each region's radio stations. Even deletion policy says that duplicate articles should be merged and redirected, not deleted outright. But if market lists are redundant to statewide lists, does that also mean that the state lists redundant to the nationwide callsign lists? All the information in the 50 state lists should also be in the 12 or so national lists, so they're "wholly redundant": should one of these sets be deleted? DHowell (talk) 09:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Owner and format information from this list has now been used to fill in appropriate blank cells in List of radio stations in California. JPG-GR (talk) 19:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There were about a dozen more of these California radio-stations-by-market lists a week ago; the bulk got prodded. We normally use templates to group stations by market rather than individual lists, so delete. Bearcat (talk) 01:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You're not suggesting that a number of contested PRODs represent a precedent for deleting the remaining ones, just because I contested them a day late? Please see WP:CLS for why the existence of templates does not justify the deletion of lists. DHowell (talk) 03:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * We don't need separate lists for each individual market, and until these California ones were created early this year we didn't have separate radio lists for any other individual radio market. California doesn't get to have unique treatment. Bearcat (talk) 07:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * These California lists were created in May and June 2007, not "early this year", and other lists outside of California have existed even longer, until they were redirected by JPG-GR in October 2007, such as:
 * List of radio stations in Chicago by name, created December 2004
 * List of radio stations in Las Vegas, created November 2006
 * As well as several statewide lists sorted by market area, such as:
 * List of radio stations in Arizona by market area, created December 2006
 * List of radio stations in Missouri by market area, created October 2006
 * List of radio stations in New York by market area, created October 2003
 * List of radio stations in North Carolina by market area, created October 2005
 * List of radio stations in Ohio by market area, created June 2006
 * List of radio stations in South Dakota by market area, created October 2004
 * List of radio stations in West Virginia by market area, created May 2006
 * List of radio stations in Wisconsin by market area, created September 2005
 * And several "Media of ..." lists still contain market area radio station lists:
 * List of media in Cumberland, MD-WV
 * Media of Fort Wayne, Indiana
 * Media of Nashville
 * List of media outlets in Quincy, Illinois
 * List of Salt Lake City media
 * Media of Toledo, Ohio
 * These lists have existed on Wikipedia for much longer than the 5 months that the statewide radio station lists have existed in their present behemoth format, and I suspect have been updated by far more people. I also believe that the larger state lists are intimidating to newbies and occasional editors (some of whom may be radio industry experts but not Wikipedia experts), and are dependent on the watchful eye of a tiny number of dedicated editors, who could leave the project at any time or go on extended wikibreaks, without whom many of the present state lists would eventually become even more out-of-date and inaccurate than their predecessors. DHowell (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of radio stations in California per JPG-GR. - Dravecky (talk) 04:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. The state list is just fine.  There is already a market area nav box so we don't need a list, category and nav box.  Vegaswikian (talk) 22:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Stockton, California article has a [[Stockton, California#Radio broadcast stations
 * much less complete list]] in its "Media" section. Would it be acceptable to refactor this list into a Media of Stockton, California or List of media in Stockton, California article, which would comprise the television station and newspaper lists from the current city article along with the radio stations? Then the city article could simply link to the media article. See the various media articles referenced above for precedent. DHowell (talk) 05:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.   —DHowell (talk) 05:50, 12 March 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.