Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WCHX


 * 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 redirect‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to List of radio stations in Pennsylvania. Liz Read! Talk! 18:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

WCHX

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article with absolutely no sources. Completely promotional, containing unsourced lists of "current" presenters and program lists. No evidence of meeting WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Companies,  and Pennsylvania. AusLondonder (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm not willing to provide a concrete !vote just yet, but I did remove the on-air staff and programming lists (which can be traced back to ), as there is a section of WP:NOT that says that these are not allowed in articles. That doesn't leave much, though; it is probably still going to take far more than that to justify keeping this under the standards of 2024 (it was created under the looser "standards" of 2007). (Notability is supposed to be determined by the existence of potential sources and not solely whether or not they are already in the article, but we still at least need to know of them to prevent deletion or redirection.)  WC  Quidditch  ☎   ✎  20:04, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete as citing one database entry does not an article make. —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 15:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of radio stations in Pennsylvania: The inclusioninst in me (what's left of it, at least) still thinks there might be an R with possibilities somewhere, but after further thought we really need significant coverage to justify an article (and even the database ref — which is never acceptable as a sole source, to the extent that having a "sole source" for an entire article is acceptable at all — was not in place at the time of nomination). Until or unless that surfaces, we can't have anything more than an R to list entry. (It is actually easily forgotten that even the pre-2021 version of NRADIO, as [invalidly?] broad as it was at least interpreted as about notability, actually against permastubs: Editors might consider creating a table listing the radio stations in an area which might be redirected to rather than creating dozens of stub articles.)  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  20:29, 25 March 2024 (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.