Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Affinity 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. Will userfy on request Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:07, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Affinity Radio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable local radio station. Long way from meeting WP:GNG. SmartSE (talk) 20:42, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as has a significant claim of being the first local DAB Station in the UK. Consensus has been that radio stations with original content are usually kept Atlantic306 (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is that a reason to ignore GNG? It was a small local business that became defunct within a year. SmartSE (talk) 12:37, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It appears the nomination was not correctly set up when nominated corrected when the page was moved. I have updated the title of the AfD to the article that is to be deleted. No comment on nomination however. Nightfury 13:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Userify. Requires more work for nowMgbo120 (talk) 19:12, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Atlantic's approach here is not really ideal and I advise the admin who will close this to read thoroughly what the Keep vote said. We cannot presume notability for a station/corporation like this, just like the nominator said. A claim of significance is not enough. So what we are going for is WP:GNG&WP:NCORP. First reference is a WP:ROUTINE announcement of the radio launch, not WP:SIGCOV and seems PR in its nature. The second one is again a WP:ROUTINE announcement of closure, citing what was said (making it no independent). In my search I found nothing except the forum links. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 10:24, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, fails WP:GNG. There's two sources; one is a perfunctory announcement in the trade press that the station exists, the other is a similar notice that it no longer exists. That's not good enough. As an aside, to Jovanmilic97, you should stick to arguing policy in AfDs. Advice directed at the closing admin is generally not useful. When I'm closing an AfD, I find it quite annoying because it's a distraction. I wouldn't have an objection to userfying it per User:Mgbo120, but somebody's got to stand up and commit to doing the work. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.