Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CJLD-FM

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CJLD-FM

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

The source verifies hardly any of this article. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 19:47, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A licensed station, so we keep it under WP:BROADCAST and WP:OUTCOMES#Broadcast media. And news coverage exists, for example [1][2][3][4][5]--Arxiloxos (talk) 23:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment then why not bung it in the bloody article then!

_Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 08:23, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:27, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But if I did think it needed improvement, I would probably not have nominated it for deletion. Ciao. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 10:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per Arxiloxos. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:36, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as sufficient third-party coverage exists for this article to cross the verifiability and notability thresholds. - Dravecky (talk) 16:41, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I updated the article with some more references, updated the infobox, lede and the entire body of the article. The schedule was in violation of WP:NOT#DIR, so I put that in text. I added one of the links Arxiloxos posted. There wasn't a need for the others. In addition to WP:BROADCAST and WP:OUTCOMES#Broadcast media, the article now more-than-meets GNG. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:12, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sourcing improvement was definitely needed here, but the only claim of notability a licensed radio station has to make to be kept on here is the fact that its existence as a licensed radio station is properly sourceable. The needed improvement has taken place, so keep. Bearcat (talk) 18:25, 10 June 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.