Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VF2509

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:56, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

VF2509[edit]

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

Unverifiable article about a low-power radio station. WP:NMEDIA deprecates VF# stations in Canada as not inherently notable, because the CRTC issued a policy change in the 2000s that exempted them from having to have broadcast licenses anymore -- meaning that it is no longer possible for us to verify whether the station is still in operation or not, because the CRTC doesn't have to issue any license renewals or revocations anymore. So while such a station could still claim a WP:GNG pass if it got reliable source coverage in media, this doesn't have that -- the only reference we have is its original CRTC license decision prior to the exemption policy. And if we can't verify its current operational status, then we can't keep it anymore. Bearcat (talk) 17:58, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: It's a community radio station, which to me is more likely to have any potential notability than, say, a tourist information station. But that still requires sufficient reliable sources to verify anything about it, particularly for a VF station without any presumption of notability — and without anything more than an initial CRTC authorization and Industry Canada's records, both of which simply prove that VF2509 was at least supposed to exist (and even when we do know something exists, existence does not prove notability on its own), can we really keep what is, for all practical purposes, a permastub? --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 00:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 16:03, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete one primary source and a directory listing do not grant notability. Fails WP:GNG. --Bejnar (talk) 01:46, 8 July 2017 (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.