Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mareco Broadcasting Network, Inc. (2nd nomination)


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure)  the enjay  36  23:32, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Mareco Broadcasting Network, Inc.
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I think this article should not stay here on Wikipedia for I can't find reliable sources about the subject, therefore not verifiable. The article has also been tagged for speedy deletion before. What do you think, guys? Should we keep the article or what? —theenjay36 (talk) 23:20, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 06:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 06:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 06:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Redirect to DWBM-FM which is the firm's main asset and whose article has coverage of the history of the firm, although equally unreferenced. Highbeam includes search coverage from Manila Times, Manila Bulletin, etc., and all that I am finding about the firm is event sponsorship name-checks, usually with "(Crossover)" appended to indicate the radio station - nothing in depth about the firm itself, so falling short of WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 07:25, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You might consider joining the discussion here, . —theenjay36 20:50, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  00:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 11:27, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khwajablessed (talk • contribs) 17:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Why do you think this page should be kept?  the enjay  36  10:20, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator.  the enjay  36  05:54, 9 January 2015 (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.