Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitz Radio

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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hitz Radio

I was the original creator of this article two years ago, but I do not believe it at all meets notability guidelines. Hitz Radio received minor media coverage back in 2007, with the odd mention in national media (mostly due to founder Ryan Dunlop being nominated for a Daily Record award through false claims of large listener figures, millions of pounds of revenue, and so forth - despite the station running from a garden shed), but this was both very brief and barely noticeable - It was appearances in lists and so forth (an example of such is here, Jason Crombie, Terry McLernon et al did not warrant an article). There is also, as shown in the references, the odd article (with much exaggeration, as some reading up will show) on business websites, as many small businesses that do not merit articles get daily. This is not the significant media coverage required to meet notability guidelines. Furthermore, as a station it never received much more than a hundred listeners, so it isn't notable in that respect either. Despite the wealth of references, the majority are to its own website and Companies House. A couple of very brief mentions in newspapers in 2007 do not assert notability, and 36,000 hits - largely unrelated as it's not too uncommon a name - on Google don't suggest much coverage beyond that. Delete. Esteffect (talk) 03:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note Because of significant contributions of other editors, this article does not meet CSD-G7--CastAStone /^{/₵₳$↑₳}^{₴₮ʘ№€} 03:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There was an original AFD at the time in 2007, the article being kept due to media coverage. There were certainly a large number of Digital Spy and new users on that AFD arguing the case, and the fact that the media coverage was very brief was largely ignored. Esteffect (talk) 03:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree that it does not justify an article but it is an interesting and amusing story which illustrates the strange world of internet radio and its UK regulation. Perhaps some parts of it could be merged somewhere as illustrative of the wider subjects? --DanielRigal (talk) 20:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as Hitz Radio and its founder were the subject of sustained media coverage and the article is referenced by multiple reliable third-party sources. That the station is defunct is not relevant since notability is not temporary. Given its unlicensed nature, I see no reason to treat it any differently that any of the other pirate radio stations. (This is not an "other stuff exists" argument, just pointing to a body of precedent for handling articles about unlicensed stations.) - Dravecky (talk) 20:03, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The media coverage was not sustained, it was brief. As I stated in my nomination, it was mostly an award received in 2007 (a minor award by a newspaper), and none of the other award winners - save Paolo Nutini - have articles. Taking away that, there is only minimal coverage on online radio-related websites that are not major sources at all. Esteffect (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply The article is cited by news reports spread across a nine-month period, coverage is in-depth and on-topic, and the assertion of notability does not rest solely on this award. Sources like The Sunday Times are hardly "radio-related websites". - Dravecky (talk) 00:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep unlike most articles we get here on streaming radio stations, this one actually has some coverage and not an insignificant amount. Sustained coverage is not necessary, notability is not temporary.--RadioFan (talk) 00:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.