Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liverpool Pirate Radio (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Liverpool Pirate Radio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
non-notable pirate radio station, AFD'd before (result delete), appears to be recreated Rapido (talk) 10:28, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this radio station. Joe Chill (talk) 17:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Rather than delete it, I'd prefer it if we could stir up some interest from the guys who ran it, maybe get them to write an article, update the page with the facts and link to them. I'll ask over at merseypirates Bitplane 10:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bitplane (talk • contribs)
- Comment - Even if this were done, it would fail WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS guidelines, and be eligible for deletion. Rapido (talk) 10:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- So an interview with the broadcaster published by a pirate radio fansite wouldn't count as a self-published source on itself? -Bitplane
- Comment - I don't think it would be acceptable to "stir up some interest" and create an article just for an excuse to use it as a reference to justify a Wikipedia entry. Remember, there are alternative outlets. Rapido (talk) 11:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- So an interview with the broadcaster published by a pirate radio fansite wouldn't count as a self-published source on itself? -Bitplane
- Comment - Even if this were done, it would fail WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS guidelines, and be eligible for deletion. Rapido (talk) 10:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow Talk 17:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 02:27, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete not even the barest claim to notability in the article, and besides that it was deleted via AfD just months ago (see previous debate). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:27, 31 December 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.