Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viva Radio 2

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 keep. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:01, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Viva Radio 2

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

I think I may be proved wrong on this, but I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NOTABILITY. Tagged by Bradv over 7 years ago; hopefully we can now get this resolve either way. Boleyn (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As the editor who originally tagged this for notability, nothing has really changed. There appear to be plenty of available sources, but they are in Italian. This article needs some help, but there's no rush. Brad 13:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:19, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as no evidence of notability fails GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 18:50, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep, easily passes GNG, 281 news articles, most of them significant coverage, in Corriere della Sera, the main Italian newspaper [1], 168 news articles in La Repubblica [2], plus a lot more [3]. The program had a television spin-off which had an audience of over 8 million viewers (!) and from the program 5 compilation cd were released, with the last one peaking first on the Italian hit parade[4]. There are plenty of choices in terms of usable sources, and notability is clear. Cavarrone 05:57, 20 April 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.