- 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 to Bandera News Philippines#Owned and operated. WP:BCAST is not a community-approved guideline, so WP:GNG, which is, takes precedence. Sandstein 19:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
DXFP
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- DXFP ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 13:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 TT me 13:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 13:28, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect to Bandera News Philippines, the parent article, where it is already mentioned in about as much detail as is in this article. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect to Bandera News Philippines#Owned and operated; WP:CHEAP Nate • ( chatter) 22:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: The station is licensed by the NTC as it indicates an operator having a station. It was initially issued a PA per 2019 NTC Listing. It was only last year's listing when it was given a callsign. That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:BCAST. ASTIG😎 ( ICE T • ICE CUBE) 10:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Meets WP:BCAST per Astig's argument. SBKSPP ( talk) 00:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Would be beneficial if the early participators could confirm whether they feel their reasoning persists
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 14:19, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Relisting comment: Would be beneficial if the early participators could confirm whether they feel their reasoning persists
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 14:19, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Reply: After you put NMEDIA through the ringer, it came back out the other side with renewed precedence-setting consensus. Let it go. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:22, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Per Astig. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:22, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per Superastig.-- Tdl1060 ( talk) 18:24, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect per Rhododendrites. Furthermore, this currently fails WP:GNG, and WP:BCAST is not a notability guideline exempt from needing to meet the GNG. The votes based entirely on "keep per BCAST" should be discarded - if this were to be kept, I'd like to see reliable secondary sources which demonstrate notability. SportingFlyer T· C 14:14, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: Our keep votes should not be discarded. Whether or not BCAST/NMEDIA is a vetted notability guideline, it has been used in conjunction with WP:BCASTOUTCOMES (and even GNG) for years. Even Neutralhomer knows this. Therefore, our keep votes really have, will have and still have merit in this discussion whatsoever. ASTIG😎 ( ICE T • ICE CUBE) 06:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- You still need to show how it passes WP:GNG. It's crystal clear WP:BCAST isn't an exemption - it's not even a notability guideline. SportingFlyer T· C 08:36, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- @ SportingFlyer: Correct, it's a notability recommendation. It has never been used an an exemption. It has been used as a recommendation.
- Currently there is a discussion going on at WT:N about this very thing, making it a Guideline per RfC. I might request these AfDs be held until that discussion and subsequent RfC is finished so that these AfDs aren't given undue weight under the current rules while a discussion/RfC is ongoing to change the rule (NMEDIA/BCAST) we are arguing over. -
Neutralhomer •
Talk • 11:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- That really shouldn't matter. The problem with this particular article is that it currently lacks the required sources under the WP:GNG to be eligible for a stand-alone article, and none have been identified to help save it. The NTC listings are clearly not significant coverage. The only other source is to the station's Facebook page. SportingFlyer T· C 13:37, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Currently there is a discussion going on at WT:N about this very thing, making it a Guideline per RfC. I might request these AfDs be held until that discussion and subsequent RfC is finished so that these AfDs aren't given undue weight under the current rules while a discussion/RfC is ongoing to change the rule (NMEDIA/BCAST) we are arguing over. -
Neutralhomer •
Talk • 11:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- ^This^: What Astig said. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:06, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect as above. NMEDIA does not reflect community consensus, and so !votes based on it are not policy-based, as explained in the closing statement here. With that, we're left with the GNG, which this article doesn't pass. (Nobody has argued to the contrary.) If you want to carve out an exemption from the GNG (a bad idea, in my view), the way to do so is with an RfC. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 17:38, 12 June 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.