Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KRFH (2nd nomination)

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. - Mailer Diablo 17:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] KRFH

KRFH (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

One-watt student radio station that seems to lack (and for which the article doesn't really assert) notability. An AfD for a nearly identical version was started yesterday, but I'm not sure whether this recreation can be speedied under G4, since the article was speedied then before the discussion got very far. Deor 02:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a legitimate student run radio station that has been in operation for 17 years. It runs side by side with a journalism class at Humboldt State University. There are 55 people currently in the class that have been instructed to add content to this page. This second article was added because the first was taken down despite a {{hangon}} tag being added. This article needs to stay on wikipedia, as its notability will be established in the coming weeks. DO NOT REMOVE —Preceding unsigned comment added by KRFH610AM (talk • contribs)

Notability has to be established as soon as the article is created. An article can be deleted the same day its created. TJ Spyke 02:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Note. Just adding that, according to the article Carrier current, stations like this one (it's specifically listed in that article) are not licensed by the FCC, and their broadcasts reach a minuscule area. FCC licensing is usually considered one of the major notability hurdles in deciding whether to keep a radio-station article. Deor 15:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a hosting server for vanity pages as class projects! Delete. Llajwa 18:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete -

• Delete, no claim exists that they meet WP:N (and there will probably never be any). Fails WP:V, no sources. meshach 03:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete; I didn't see the previous version, but this article barely asserts importance (if at all). Masaruemoto 04:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete and Salt Running for 17 years doesn't make it notable. One of my cupboards is that old and that's not notable either. Likewise under the terms of WP:Crystal we do not tolerate articles concerning things that might prove their notablity at some later date. The subject of any wikipedia article must be notable on the day the article is created. This radio station broadcasts to virtually no-one, doesn't have a national broadcasting license and therefore it simply isn't notable. Salt in the light of recreation. A1octopus 16:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I had a cat older than this radio station, and could probably yell and be heard as far as its carrier travels, and have certainly sent out CB transmissions which went further. Are there multiple independent reliable sources with substantial coverage of it? Otherwise, as a non-licensed hobby broadcaster it is non-notable. Edison 18:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Existence does not equate to notable. The show on the college radio station I'm listening to has been on for 21 years with the same host barely qualifies for a paragraph on a disambiguation page. jonathon 05:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete and salt If I'm not mistaken, this is the fourth time this has been created, with some poor excuse for notability each time (it was speedied once under A1 and once under A3). I know people who have created a just-as-powerful radio station in technology class. The article's creator also thinks that claiming "details will be added in the next few weeks" is enough to keep the article. If this is deleted, it will probably be recreated again, hence the salt (though it does qualify for an G4 speedy, how do we know that the person that comes round and tags it will know of the AfD?). NF24^{(radio me!}_{Editor review)} 21:58, 29 October 2007 (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.