WVPP-LP: However, radio stations must meet the general notability guideline , requiring "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".  Lacking any secondary sources.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 18:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and West Virginia .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 18:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose OP has nominated multiple articles for deletion per ORGCRIT.   As many of you know, the criterion for article creation changed a couple years back.   That said, in 2007, when this article was created, it met the criterion.   We shouldn't be retro-actively placing all articles to new criterion.   I would recommend the OP actually look for secondary sources, instead of nominating everything for deletion (which seems to be their MO).   This will be my only post on this matter.  - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I understand your frustration.  I'm not a newbie and I am aware that notability requirements have, appropriately and by community consensus, been made more stringent.  However the idea that different rules would apply to different articles depending on time of creation doesn't make any sense.  Having unsourced articles does no service to an encyclopedia or our readers.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 19:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as there is no secondary coverage of the station, so it does not appear to meet GNG.  Guidelines at time of creation are irrelevant, we go off our current rules.  March OfThe Greyhounds 18:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:23, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is, if anything, a remnant of those looser 2007 notability "guidelines" — but, often for good reason, there's no grandfather clause when notability guidelines are tightened (the biggest move in that direction, at least in this topic area, was this 2021 RfC that found there was no consensus for any looser notability guideline for broadcast stations than the GNG).  Articles that seemed to meet notability guidelines 17 years ago but fall short (if not well short) today are brought to AfD all the time; indeed, most probably only last that long because they are largely flying under the radar (a new article that looked like this would, if not nominated for deletion, at least be moved out of mainspace pretty quickly today).  In general, newer broadcast stations (and this one only broadcast for 14 years before folding) are less likely to attain the significant coverage required to meet GNG.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of radio stations in West Virginia .  (Disclaimer: I have a long history of friendly interaction with the article's creator.)  What little content currently here is useful, and I don't think something should be deleted outright if redirection is a viable alternative.  If I can find the time, then I would like to find sources to add more material on this station.  Dylan 620 (he/him • talk • edits ) 12:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Subject does not have the requisite sources to meet the WP:GNG .  FCC databases just don't cut it.  Let'srun ( talk ) 23:15, 24 March 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete