192:: "Licensed radio and TV stations are notable if they broadcast over the air and originate at least a portion of their programming schedule in their own studios. Lower power radio stations limited to a small neighborhood, such as Part 15 operations in the United States or stations with a VF# callsign in Canada, are not inherently notable, although they may be kept if some real notability can be demonstrated. Stations that only rebroadcast the signal of another station should be redirected to their programming source (e.g. CICO-TV is a redirect to TVOntario.) Internet radio stations are notable if they can demonstrate a clear and verifiable cultural notability or influence. AOL Radio and WOXY, for instance, are clearly notable, but your own personal Peercast stream with three listeners is not.
539:
stations that broadcast in, say, Los
Angeles --- and in fact, in L.A., most people don't know the stations; they tune in to a format they prefer, and might be reminded that they're listening to "KISS 105". How many listeners they have depends, in large part, on how many people live within the range of the signal, along with how many other stations are competing in the same area. As such, Bucksnort County might have only a couple of stations, whereas Los Angeles County would have lots of stations. However, even a small radio station or high school is a significant part of the community where it operates. Luckily, there are relatively few things that are considered "inherently notable", and this is one of them.
212:
station is granted the right to broadcast in a particular range, the common outcome so far has been that it does not have to justify its importance further through newspaper coverage. In some cases, such "inherent notability" is presumed in order to avoid notability debates. As another example, a
Congressman from Illinois in 1920 may not have done anything significant, but the question is made moot by a guideline. In this case, this is a "common outcome", not a set guideline, but there are some things-- high schools, radio stations, elected officials-- that are normally given a presumption. I hope that helps.
473:
and now having read it I take a very dim view of the fact that I am being accused of disrupting
Knowledge (XXG) or whatever phrase it uses. How about accepting the fact that some people contribute a lot to Knowledge (XXG) without knowing about every policy and guideline and are in fact acting in good
460:
This is a classic case of one of the problems with
Knowledge (XXG), if I had not mentioned that I wanted 'to ascertain whether or not ALL licensed radio stations are in fact notable' and merely put the article forward for discussion all would be well. The outcome would be the same but I wouldn't have
273:
I think that the nominator admitted that the nomination was made "to ascertain whether or not ALL licensed radio stations are in fact notable and worthy of inclusion; he/she might not have been aware of the admonition against making a nomination in order to prove a point, and testing the rules with a
491:
My intent was certainly not to accuse you of anything. I was merely responding to your stated intent and reasoning for nominating this article for deletion. In any case, if you will review the article as it now stands, I think you will find it much improved over the state you found it in yesterday.
509:
Thank you, I appreciate your comment. The article is much improved but then I never thought that it was a bad article, I just cannot understand how such a small, local radio station is in any way notable, I disagree with the whole premise that ALL radio stations are notable, but as I said I seem to
168:
I'm happy to withdraw this nomination if it is the policy of
Knowledge (XXG) that the mere fact it is a radio station makes it notable and it seems that the other contributors to this debate feel the same. I must say though that I am incredulous that this is the case but I guess I'll have to be the
150:
I want to put this article forward to ascertain whether or not ALL licensed radio stations are in fact notable and worthy of inclusion. This article is in all likelihood created by one of the husband and wife team that run this very local AM radio station. It has no third party refs/links and I can
538:
radio stations, high schools, incorporated villages, etc., would be able to win a notability debate based on significant coverage outside the local area. By nature, almost all radio stations have to be local, since their maximum power is limited to 50,000 watts. Most people can't name any radio
282:. If you agree, now, that Knowledge (XXG) has a policy on station articles, withdrawing the nomination would seem to be the appropriate thing to do. Many a time, I've had to say "I stand corrected", and I think that's true of all of us. We learn the rules by participating in Knowledge (XXG).
211:
Television series broadcast nationally by a major network or produced by a major studio are notable." The concept, as I understand it, is that governments regulate the use of the airwaves, and decide whether a a station should be licensed. In the United States, it's the FCC does this. Once a
207:
Satellite radio channels on XM, Sirius or WorldSpace may be acceptable, but if they merely relay an existing conventional broadcast service such as Fox News or
Deutsche Welle, then the satellite service should be written about as part the existing service's article rather than as a separate
189:
That's been the way it's been treated. To answer the question, it's somewhat difficult to find the commentary, and it's not so much a strict rule as it is a "common outcome". This is from
143:
415:
389:
320:. All stations are notable, period, and even if the article was written by station staff, at least it gives a foundation to go from so we can
17:
534:
I understand where you're coming from, Paste. I can only say what the rationale is for the policy. When you get right down to it,
657:
643:
608:
574:
242:
61:
439:
Government licensed full-power broadcast radio stations are notable, procedural keep in any case as nominator is making a
110:
105:
114:
684:
36:
97:
683:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
353:
I have reduced the promotional tone of the article considerably so all concerns have hopefully been addressed.
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
190:
77:
274:
nomination is similar. Anyway, now you know more about the policy concerning licensed radio stations
654:
640:
605:
571:
239:
659:
645:
628:
610:
596:
576:
548:
519:
501:
483:
452:
430:
404:
377:
348:
321:
308:
291:
265:
244:
221:
178:
160:
79:
592:
544:
368:
339:
287:
217:
624:
497:
448:
304:
560:
470:
466:
440:
317:
279:
253:
426:
400:
261:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
49:
65:
634:
Wow, I predate that guideline. Still, the radio part of that basically says nothing at all.
616:
564:
651:
637:
602:
568:
515:
479:
236:
174:
156:
57:
559:
It is wrong to say that testing a deletion to see what the unwritten rules are violated
588:
540:
356:
327:
283:
213:
101:
620:
493:
462:
444:
300:
474:
faith. Anyhow as I stated earlier today (see above) I'm happy to withdraw this AfD.
563:. If we never test to see if consensus is the same as it used to be, we will never
469:. I have been active on Knowledge (XXG) for over two years and have never heard of
422:
396:
257:
131:
511:
475:
170:
152:
93:
85:
650:
That's an Essay, not a guideline. It carries no weight whatsoever.--
677:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
52:. Discussion of policy should continue elsewhere. Potentially a
601:
The ones regarding the notability of radio stations...--
252:
Tone of nomination demonstrates that this was nominated
138:
127:
123:
119:
587:
Which "unwritten rules" are you referring to exactly?
235:. Its a radio station. Its very much encyclopedic.--
567:. Nominating this was fine, deleting it is wrong.--
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
687:). No further edits should be made to this page.
619:guidelines, among others, are not unwritten. -
416:list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions
8:
390:list of Radio-related deletion discussions
465:talking about 'procedural keeps' due to
414:: This debate has been included in the
388:: This debate has been included in the
151:not see how it is in any way notable.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
316:Nomination made only to make a
1:
660:05:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
646:05:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
629:20:57, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
611:19:57, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
597:01:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
577:22:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
565:know if consensus has changed
549:18:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
520:15:40, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
502:15:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
484:14:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
453:14:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
431:12:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
405:12:55, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
378:06:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
349:06:35, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
309:05:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
292:03:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
266:01:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
245:22:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
222:14:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
179:08:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
161:13:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
80:06:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
704:
510:be in a minority of one.
680:Please do not modify it.
299:The station is notable.
32:Please do not modify it.
233:Strongest Possible Keep
278:the policy concerning
54:Nomination Withdrawn
44:The result was
433:
419:
407:
393:
375:
346:
169:odd one out here
74:
70:
62:non-admin closure
695:
682:
420:
410:
394:
384:
376:
371:
365:
364:
359:
347:
342:
336:
335:
330:
254:to prove a point
141:
135:
117:
75:
72:
68:
34:
703:
702:
698:
697:
696:
694:
693:
692:
691:
685:deletion review
678:
369:
362:
357:
354:
340:
333:
328:
325:
137:
108:
92:
89:
66:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
701:
699:
690:
689:
673:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
662:
648:
585:
584:
583:
582:
581:
580:
579:
529:
528:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
522:
461:editors like
434:
408:
382:
381:
380:
311:
294:
268:
247:
229:
228:
227:
226:
225:
224:
209:
200:
199:
198:
197:
196:
195:
194:
193:
182:
181:
148:
147:
88:
83:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
700:
688:
686:
681:
675:
674:
661:
658:
656:
653:
649:
647:
644:
642:
639:
635:
632:
631:
630:
626:
622:
618:
614:
613:
612:
609:
607:
604:
600:
599:
598:
594:
590:
586:
578:
575:
573:
570:
566:
562:
558:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
546:
542:
537:
533:
532:
531:
530:
521:
517:
513:
508:
505:
504:
503:
499:
495:
490:
487:
486:
485:
481:
477:
472:
468:
464:
459:
456:
455:
454:
450:
446:
442:
438:
435:
432:
428:
424:
417:
413:
409:
406:
402:
398:
391:
387:
383:
379:
374:
372:
361:
360:
352:
351:
350:
345:
343:
332:
331:
323:
319:
315:
312:
310:
306:
302:
298:
295:
293:
289:
285:
281:
277:
272:
269:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
248:
246:
243:
241:
238:
234:
231:
230:
223:
219:
215:
210:
206:
205:
204:
203:
202:
201:
191:
188:
187:
186:
185:
184:
183:
180:
176:
172:
167:
166:
165:
164:
163:
162:
158:
154:
145:
140:
133:
129:
125:
121:
116:
112:
107:
103:
99:
95:
91:
90:
87:
84:
82:
81:
78:
76:
63:
60:to the nom. (
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
679:
676:
633:
535:
506:
488:
457:
436:
411:
385:
366:
355:
337:
326:
313:
296:
275:
270:
249:
232:
149:
53:
45:
43:
31:
28:
437:Speedy Keep
314:Strong Keep
297:Strong Keep
250:Speedy keep
652:CastAStone
638:CastAStone
603:CastAStone
569:CastAStone
237:CastAStone
58:good faith
589:Mandsford
541:Mandsford
423:• Gene93k
397:• Gene93k
324:further.
284:Mandsford
214:Mandsford
94:WMRO (AM)
86:WMRO (AM)
621:Dravecky
561:WP:POINT
494:Dravecky
471:WP:POINT
467:WP:POINT
463:Dravecky
445:Dravecky
441:WP:POINT
301:Alansohn
280:WP:POINT
208:article.
144:View log
458:Comment
370:chatter
341:chatter
258:Nyttend
111:protect
106:history
50:WP:SNOW
617:WP:NME
322:fix it
139:delete
115:delete
512:Paste
507:Reply
489:Reply
476:Paste
318:point
171:Paste
153:Paste
142:) – (
132:views
124:watch
120:links
56:, in
16:<
625:talk
615:The
593:talk
545:talk
516:talk
498:talk
480:talk
449:talk
443:. -
427:talk
412:Note
401:talk
386:Note
358:Nate
329:Nate
305:talk
288:talk
271:Keep
262:talk
218:talk
175:talk
157:talk
128:logs
102:talk
98:edit
73:ANDA
69:ARTH
46:keep
536:few
421:--
418:.
392:.
276:and
256:.
636:--
627:)
595:)
547:)
518:)
500:)
492:-
482:)
451:)
429:)
403:)
307:)
290:)
264:)
220:)
177:)
159:)
130:|
126:|
122:|
118:|
113:|
109:|
104:|
100:|
64:)
48:.
655:/
641:/
623:(
606:/
591:(
572:/
543:(
514:(
496:(
478:(
447:(
425:(
399:(
395:—
373:)
367:(
363:•
344:)
338:(
334:•
303:(
286:(
260:(
240:/
216:(
173:(
155:(
146:)
136:(
134:)
96:(
71:P
67:D
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.