Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KISW Duck 1977-1980

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge to KISW-FM. Rob Church ^{Talk | FAHD} 00:12, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] KISW Duck 1977-1980

del nonnotable. Verifiable? A whole zero google hits for "KISW dick" today (while wikipedia mirrors didn't pick it up). mikka (t) 17:51, 12 October 2005 (UTC) mikka (t) 06:23, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep notable, if verifiable. Kappa 09:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, "if". I failed to find a confirmation. mikka (t) 17:51, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete if the radio station has no article, otherwise merge and redirect. A mascot doesn't need a separate article. -- Kjkolb 14:30, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Suggect rename to KISW and make it a seed for the radio station article. KISW is the heavy metal rock station in Seattle, and has some degree of notability. — RJH 17:10, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Abstain. At some point someone will write a KISW-FM article, and this belongs in it. Lean towards keep so that the text can be incorporated into that article when it's written. (If doing so is against a policy that I missed somewhere, let me know and I'll change my vote.) PacknCanes 17:11, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
  • the policy is wikipedia:verifiability. It looks extremely suspicious to me that this duck is the most prominent member of KISW while leaving absolutely no traces on the 'net, including their own website, http://www.kisw.com/ . mikka (t) 17:51, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Stations don't put anything about their history on their website more often than not; see WKNR-AM for a station that does nothing to honor its (significant) history on its website. And if we're in the business of rejecting all AfDs for radio stations simply because they're radio stations, then eventually this station will get an article. Barring a complete hoax (which this, admittedly, could be), I just hate to lose this writeup because it really could go into an article that hasn't been written yet. Still abstaining; I won't be upset if it's deleted, but I don't think it should be necessarily. PacknCanes 19:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
      • You are not listening: wikipedia:verifiability is the major benchmark here. The anon author came and go. Why would we care about the fate of this opus of untraceable source more than s/he? mikka (t) 23:03, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Unverifiable. I'll change to a keep if someone manages to verify it. --Apyule 05:58, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, no original research (and if it can't be verified, that's exactly what it is). Proto t c 11:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• My name is Daniel O'Brien I protrayed the KISW Duck from 1977-80 and contributed this article. I am willing to verify any of the claims made in the article if necessary. My user name is artistdogboy --artistdogboy 21:02, 13 October 2005 (UTC)````

  With all due respect, Sir, I would very much love to have your story here. Unfortunately there is a policy wikipedia:No original research, exsisting for serious reasons. Please provide sources of independent verification of the events you are describing. A good idea could be to ask the KISW webmaster to post your blog story at their site. I think my colleagues agree that this would count for an independent verification. Also, if you could contribute to KISW (KISW-FM) article, your tale would have a much better standing. Thank you, mikka (t) 21:37, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

  With all due respect, Mikka, someone who was the duck would be a primary source, a fine source for material. Doing their own writing would need vanity checks but isn't original research. The article "makes no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, or evaluative claims". The intent of WP:NOR is to remove Wikipedia from publishing crank physics theories and not to dissuade people from writing about personal experience.

• Merge and redirect to KISW, even if it is the only content on KISW. Putting it in the Category:Seattle will get some attention quickly. SchmuckyTheCat 23:03, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • and done, wow would that have been difficult for any of the previous commenters here? SchmuckyTheCat 23:12, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Oh we can merge things while they are on AFD now, I hadn't realized that. BTW Schmucky if you merge things, you are supposed to mention the article they came from in the summary. Kappa 23:30, 13 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.