Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radio Wey


 * 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 no consensus. Not enough people have taken part in the debate. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:39, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Radio Wey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article references non-notable sources, and was created by a likely undisclosed COI editor. A preliminary WP:BEFORE didn't unearth much else. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  00:24, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 07:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can source it better than this. Under WP:NMEDIA, the only notability claim that a radio station actually has to make to be keepable is that it exists as a properly licensed radio station that originates at least some of its own programming — it doesn't need to make any claim that would make it a special "more notable than other radio stations" case, as our goal for radio stations is to be as complete as feasibly possible a reference for all of them. But "as feasibly possible" is the operative part of that equation, because NMEDIA doesn't extend radio stations an exemption from having to be reliably sourced — they still have to be the subject of at least some coverage in media other than their own self-published content about themselves — but there's virtually no evidence of that being shown here, as the referencing is virtually entirely to primary sources that can't support notability. So no, it doesn't need a stronger notability claim than is already present here, but it does need stronger referencing to support it than this. Bearcat (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 01:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, The history of Radio Wey stems from 1965 and is of historical importance to the development of radio in the United kingdom. In 1965 there was only the BBC 'light program' and a handful of illegal offshore pirate radio stations. Hospital Radio Wey (as it was known back then), together with a small number of other hospital radio stations, brought a local personalized radio service to those in hospital to relieve suffering. It is hard now to imagine but these groundbreaking radio stations pre-dated the national UK BBC radio station, Radio 1 by 2 years and local BBC radio wasn't even thought of at that time. The citations given do provide credibility from independent sources, to the the background of the station in more modern times but alas not much was written down in the early years that has made it to the internet (which it also predates but now embraces). Hospital Radio Wey has produced its own programming content since 1965 and continues to this day providing the relief of suffering to patients. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tardis27 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * What citations in the article represent credible and substantive coverage in reliable sources? There's virtually no media coverage at all, merely namechecks of its existence in directly affiliated sources that can never support the notability of anything. We keep an article when its claims of notability are properly sourced, not just when its claims of notability are asserted — articles can and do lie about notability claims that the subject doesn't actually have in reality, so we require reliable source coverage in media, not just unsourced or primary sourced assertions of notability. Bearcat (talk) 17:17, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jdcomix (talk) 20:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Ivec os  (t) 19:14, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I have just found a reliable source http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-19530328 which according to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources is considered as from "News reporting" from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact. Are more references similar to this required ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tardis27 (talk • contribs) 17:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That source just briefly namechecks Radio Wey's existence in an article that's fundamentally about the hospital's overall volunteer program rather than about the radio station specifically. What we're really looking for is sources that are about the station, not just sources that mention the station's name. Bearcat (talk) 14:55, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 00:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

From 1972: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gUwiAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Radio+Wey%22&dq=%22Radio+Wey%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWwrX6-M_ZAhWkAsAKHQlfDXsQ6AEITTAI From 1980: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AiFFAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA3525&dq=%22Radio+Wey%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWwrX6-M_ZAhWkAsAKHQlfDXsQ6AEISTAH It seems to me that RadioWey is being treated unfairly and asked to jump through lots of hoops in maintaining the article and also implying that it doesn't actually exist. I note that there are several radio stations in the US with little or no referencing and are not flagged for deletion. Why the apparent disparity ? Examples KAVL, KBDG, KBLF, KDB (FM), KZSB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tardis27 (talk • contribs) 10:49, 3 March 2018 (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.