Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix 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 speedy keep. per SK1 (The delete !vote isn't really a !vote in terms of !voting) - Sources provided so wrapping it up. (Thanks JMWt). (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 15:55, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix Radio

Phoenix 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 radio station, Fails GNG –Davey2010^Talk 02:25, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per Davey, not notable TypingInTheSky (talk) 02:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - has OFCOM license so meets notability criteria. The page is rubbish and needs better sources, I have found refs in local media, OFCOM docs etc. Suggest pear back the page to what can be reffed to non-primary sources. JMWt (talk) 09:14, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have the refs ? ... If you add them either here or on the article I can wrap this up, Other than the cites to its own site there doesn't seem to have been better cites in prev revisions, Cheers, –Davey2010^Talk 14:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time this pm to tackle the page, but this is the OFCOM details page, this is a news article by a local hospital relating to a radio programme, this is a mention in a local newspaper article, this is a mention of funding by the National Lottery, this is a local media report about funding... I agree that it is quite thin, but with more time I think more references would be found. JMWt (talk) 15:23, 11 November 2015 (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.