Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science in Action (radio programme)


 * 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. Geschichte (talk) 20:13, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Science in Action (radio programme)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not meet WP:GNG. The only source is written by a BBC employee and the only independent source I could find is an article from The Press Gazette that only contains a trivial mention. The WP:PROD was removed without any reason provided. TipsyElephant (talk) 21:05, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:19, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:19, 4 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The programme goes back over 60 years and it is still in production – see BBC Sounds. It is therefore the longest running radio programme about science, as documented and detailed in the Journal of Science Communication.  As it is broadcast on the World Service, it has an international audience and so there is coverage in other languages such as Science et culture dans Science in Action (BBC World Service) and Discours médiatique spécialisé : la vulgarisation (popularisation) à la BBC Radio.  See WP:BEFORE; WP:NEXIST and WP:ATD, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page."   For specific guidance, see WP:RPRGM which states that "Generally, an individual radio or television program is likely to be notable if it airs on a network of radio or television stations (either national or regional in scope)"  The BBC's World Service satisfies this, as it broadcasts across the globe. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:52, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. While RPRGM is in NMEDIA, which is looking like it's not aligned with consensus in other areas, this would still meet the GNG per Andrew Davidson. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 03:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:RPRGM with sources presented by Andrew. They're reliable enough IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 04:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, The program is going on for a long time and satisfies WP:RPRGM per above. Alex-h (talk) 07:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Andrew above. /Julle (talk) 14:16, 10 July 2021 (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.