Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DYCR-TV

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. Without objection to redirecting. Stifle (talk) 10:42, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYCR-TV

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

A PROD was filed by user:Bejnar, but it was removed by a new user whose only actions were the removal of a dozen PROD templates. Instead of restoring the PROD, I am turning it into an AFD. The original PROD rationale was "lack of notability, receives no indepenent coverage, fails the general notability guidelines" The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:26, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 05:04, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 05:04, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Sixth o f March 05:30, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cebu Catholic Television Network#CCTN stations per common outcomes of network stations originating little to no original programming themselves. Nate • (chatter) 07:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no redirect for the reasons I expressed in the PROD, namely lack of notability, because it has not received independent coverage and thus fails the general notability guidelines. Generally speaking the other TV call letter combos in the CCTN stations list do not have redirects, because they, like this one, are just repeater stations, and the search term that would be used is "CCTN", see their website, which does not even list their repeaters, see the search here for confirmation. --Bejnar (talk) 19:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's no harm in keeping this as a redirect. Even if CCTN plays down the calls for their stations except for flashing them when legally required, the broadcast authority of the Philippines has them listed and that's what they broadcast. Nate • (chatter) 23:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The point being that it is not known as "DYCR-TV". --Bejnar (talk) 05:16, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter; the common naming pattern with North American and Filipino station articles is that the call letters are the main means of identifying a station in an article. It's harmless to have DYCR redirect to CCTN in case someone is looking for it in that manner. Nate • (chatter) 06:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects are for navigation. A redirect for a station name that it is not known by is useless. Redirects are cheap, but not free. --Bejnar (talk) 07:11, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the last time, per WP:BCASTOUTCOMES, we nearly always redirect official government calls for a repeater to their mother network or station. This is my last time saying this. Nate • (chatter) 07:48, 21 January 2016 (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.