Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ski patrol radio frequencies


 * 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 Speedy delete - G7 - author/sole contributor request via blanking. &mdash; User: (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Ski patrol radio frequencies

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

violates WP:NOT; this is not a repository for indiscriminate tabular data. Delete Mhking 00:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Do not delete, great resource JimmieJay|21:38, 22 March 2007 Question: Can the original author just remove the article, I see no need to fight the system and I appear to be upsetting both the ski patrol and the wiki gods. Might as well not embrace digital informationSkibum101 17:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, seems to be a good faith but clear misunderstanding by the author of what Wikipedia is not. — Krimpet (talk/review) 01:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't understand the context behind the article on a quick glance. It would be nice to fix this issue or otherwise integrate the table source links to other articles.  --Sigma 7 02:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete —  per WP:NOT. Incidentally, the contrib by User:JimmieJay is that user's only contrib.   Philippe Beaudette 04:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, weakly. On the page I saw, most of its text seems to belong on a talk page rather than in an article.  This seems to have always been the case.  Now, the actual list of frequencies was removed, wrongly: in the USA, all radio frequencies apart from cell phones are public property, and with that exception all are open to be received by the general public.  Magazines for radio hobbyinsts publish frequency lists for private radio services all the time.  I used to eavesdrop on fast food order windows, myself.  On the other hand, I'm not sure that Wikipedia is the right place to publish this sort of data.  This is not "indiscriminate data", though. - Smerdis of Tlön 13:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The actual data is no longer on the page anyway. Scienter 14:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Do NOT Delete' This is extremely valuable information for ski patrollers! ==
 * Comment: Perhaps, but it can easily be posted on a web site instead, and probably is. Realkyhick 07:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Realkyhick 07:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nice idea but does not belong here Robbielatchford 17:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete Since it violates WP:NOT. Acalamari 18:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete The page as I saw it was not informative to the casual reader - however, a good article about ski patrols could mention their existence - and either link to a list, or, better I think, to an external site that lists them. I don't think WP is the place for the list to simply stand as a "reference". human 20:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The information has been removed anyway; someone decided that it "it is not appropriate to have it viewable by the general public as it represents FCC licensed private radio frequencies." — Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 21:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I have not heard of "licensed private secret radio frequencies." Places like Radio Shack have long sold big directories of all sorts of radio frequencies used by private companies, transportation companies, and government agencies. Anyone with a scanner can find them and publish them, and generally federally licensed use of the airwaves is public information. I could see deleting it as a violation of WP:NOT. Wow, it was really hard to find the text of the article from the history file. The original source info was from http://www.kc8unj.com/vx6.htm which, when you click on it, "Does not exist." So the info also fails WP:ATT unless a reliable source is cited for it. We shouild discourage such frequency listing because of verification problems and because they change from time to time, making it a maintenance nightmare, and because of the literal millions of entries worldwide that might result. Edison 01:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per edison Captain panda   In   vino   veritas  00:25, 25 March 2007 (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.