Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tree Frog 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 Delete. Chetblong^Talk_Sign 05:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tree Frog Radio

Tree Frog Radio (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

A non notable radio station in every sense. After a 'Google' search one blog found that relates to it. Paste (talk) 20:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Delete, I was about to nominate it myself. I was declined speedy earlier for reasons I don't understand. It's nothing but an advertisement as evidenced by the image of the station schedule and, in any case, it's not notable. Redfarmer (talk) 20:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable whatsoever. Jmlk17 21:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep as a radio fan I would like to think that all permanent radio broadcast stations are notable enough for wikipedia. But is there a policy on that? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
• delete changing my vote after searching for it, and half the hits are due to wikipedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • This is not a permanent radio station but a pirate radio station and previous consensus is that almost all pirate radio stations are not notable. The way you can tell this is a pirate radio station is that, by international agreement, all call signs for radio stations in Canada must begin with the letter "C" just as all call signs for radio stations in the states must begin with either a "K" (west coast) or "W" (east coast). If this station were a legitimate, permanent station with the call sign that it indicates it has (DIRT-FM), then, under the international agreement, the station would be located in Germany as Germany currently has the "D" letter call signs. See ITU prefix for more information. Redfarmer (talk) 08:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
    • If it really is a pirate station then I will change my mind, as notability then has to be established in other ways, but the article does not mention that it is unlicenced or pirate. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
      • No, the article doesn't mention it because the creator has been putting a nice spin on it. 10 watt transmitter, micro powered station, radio-free, and community operated are all clues as well in addition to the call sign. These are all really nice ways of saying pirate radio station. It's the difference between saying "secretary" and "administrative assistant:" they're both the same thing but one makes the person sound a hell of a lot more important than they actually are. BTW, my credentials for being able to tell these things are that I've been an amateur radio operator since 1996 and a shortwave radio enthusiast since 1994. Redfarmer (talk) 08:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
• KeepI am completely new to this wiki thing. I am a writer (really) and I am trying to describe part by part (article by article) a musical and social sub culture that has developed around my neck of the woods(Vancouver Island BC CANADA).It may seem to some half way around that world (and how quickly too!) that Tree Frog Radio is a "non notable radio station",but with a little loving kindness and patience I think all will agree it is worth the time taken to describe a real fun and meaningful musical sub culture "scene" that developed around Hornby Island (and elsewhere) BC CANADA thanks for listening Ben Wobbles (talk) 05:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  • The issue here is whether it is notable or not, and it seems to fail several Wikipedia policies, especially WP:N and WP:V. To be considered notable, a subject must have received independent, verifiable coverage in secondary source material. Redfarmer (talk) 08:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. An unlicensed 10-watt pirate station without the slightest shred of a suggestion of reliable sources or of even local impact? Not even close. --Calton | Talk 16:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_radio_stations_in_British_Columbia&oldid=154755112#Denman_Island since this page began (List_of_radio_stations_in_British_Columbia) in aug of 2007 there has been mention of tree frog radio, I happened to read this page and decided I had more information to help fill in the gaps of knowledge on this page (List_of_radio_stations_in_British_Columbia)regarding ctfr, I am adding to the pool of info that someone already deemed "notable"(and wikipedia accepted since aug 2007). this is not a vanity thing I am enhancing the amount of verifiable and true and meaningful info on this page(List_of_radio_stations_in_British_Columbia) by creating a page about tfr, someone was/is obviously interested enuf in radio stations in bc to have listed the existence of ctrf since aug 2007, think about it for a minute, how can it be "notable" and ok for someone to talk about radio in bc since aug 2007 (and mention the reception of tfr) and a half a year later when I add to the info you can think it is "not notable". I am directly enhancing information that already exists on wikipedia. this style of thinking ("non notable")is nonsense, and frankly I am surprised that some want to kill this article from day one. what may appear "not notable" in the beginning to some may be historically valuable (significant) info to others, it is a matter of perspective and acceptance. an encyclopedia is for subject that you already know about, it is also (maybe even more so) for subjects you don't know about yet. Let's keep the article and see where we can go from here, how about ? Ben Wobbles (talk) 17:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

As I've stated before, other stuff exists is not a valid criteria for inclusion. The only way the article can remain is if there are secondary sources establishing non-trivial coverage of the pirate station in question. No one has suggested that the article be deleted because we don't know anything about it. We're saying the article should be deleted because it is non-notable. Redfarmer (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete The article diff above says that the radio station at 89.1FM on Denman Island was CFTR, which was recently changed to Tree Frog Radio, both the current and the above diff say that it is a community radio station. Neither of these two show up in the list of community radio stations on the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission website. An internet search for both of these two show no secondary sources that discuss these stations. Without secondary sources to show notability the article should be deleted. Jons63 (talk) 19:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• weak delete as above, no notability has been demonstrated. (It might not be a "pirate" station, mind you: we have some funny rules here in Canada. For example, I think First Nations can run 10-Watt community radio xmitters on their land without a hassle.) I'm also concerned that I'm completely unable to find "Denimwood" or "Pentlatch" on Vancouver Island. Someone, please try to prove this isn't a hoax! AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 19:36, 23 March 2008 (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.