Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DZSB (Bansud)

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 redirect to Subic Broadcasting Corporation. WP:GNG takes precedence over WP:BCAST, which isn't a guideline. Sandstein 14:51, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DZSB (Bansud)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:13, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Doesn't appear to meet WP:NRADIO. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 18:16, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The station is licensed per 2019 and last year's NTC listings, as well as its respective province's Facts and Figures. That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:BCAST/WP:BCASTOUTCOMES. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 15:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:BCAST does not override GNG, and isn't even really a notability guideline. SportingFlyer T·C 18:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NMEDIA is a notability recommendation. Notability guideline discussion to setup talking points for the RfC to make NMEDIA/BCAST a Guideline is ongoing at WT:N. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it's only a "recommendation," then it clearly must comply with WP:GNG, meaning we need reliable secondary sources in order to show it's eligible for a stand-alone article. Even if it becomes a guideline, the vast majority of guidelines either require the GNG to be met, are written in such a way that GNG will be met if the guideline is met, or provide even stricter guidance than merely meeting GNG, so having this become a guideline isn't really relevant for this discussion considering there aren't enough sources to justify a stand-alone article. SportingFlyer T·C 13:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:BCAST per Astig's and Neutralhomer's argument. SBKSPP (talk) 00:36, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BCAST. To quote BCAST "Notability can be established by either a large audience, established broadcast history, or being the originator of some programming." As far as I can tell, no sources mentioned in the article or in this discussion indicate numbers of listeners (its not enough to show they broadcast in a certain region but there must be evidence that people are actually listening), describe broadcast history, or assert that the station has original programming. In short, notability as described in BCAST has not yet been proven.4meter4 (talk) 23:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Subic Broadcasting Corporation per WP:CHEAP, WP:PRESERVE, etc. Since NMEDIA is not a guideline, arguments rooted in it are not policy-based. See the closing statements here, here, and here. The GNG thus applies, and it's not disputed that this article doesn't meet it. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 02:58, 13 June 2021 (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.