Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outreach Radio

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. The keep rationales do not appear to adequately rebut the concerns about lack of sourcing that would show notability per WP:GNG. Aoidh (talk) 21:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Outreach Radio[edit]

[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)

I'm not seeing any meaningful coverage that shows this minor radio station passing WP:GNG. Most of the content has been added by a (declared) COI editor and the vast majority of sources cited are either primary sources or passing mentions. The only genuinely independent sources cited are local newspapers describing a single charity dance run by the radio station. WP:BEFORE did not reveal a rich seam of untapped sources, and I could not find any specific coverage of this station.

WP:NRADIO did not make it as a guideline, so radio stations have to pass WP:GNG and I can't see any way in which this one does. Flip Format (talk) 13:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, United Kingdom, and England. Flip Format (talk) 13:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the other stations that are available as notable stations worth having as Wikipedia articles in the region of broadcast (Hampshire), Outreach Radio and Outreach Dance are definitely notable enough to remain on Wikipedia.

In the least COI-manner possible, I would like to emphasise the fact that Outreach Radio and Outreach Dance remain as the only independent regional radio stations in the region, following the buyouts of major conglomerates in the region over the course of the last few years [1].

Apart from the community stations of the region, who do not have nearly the same coverage as Outreach Radio and Outreach Dance, there remains no "Independent" radio stations in South Hampshire, in the sense that they have fully localised programming, created by local presenters for their region - the closest comparison would be Wave 105, however they are officially part of the Hits Radio network, owned by Bauer Media Audio UK and are more aligned with their sister stations, rather than other independents such as those running Outreach Radio Ltd.

Should the two stations' notablilty, despite their size, be of question, I would like to also remind readers of this discussion for two Southampton-based community radio stations: Voice FM 103.9 and Unity 101, both of which are significantly smaller in coverage compared to Outreach Radio and Outreach Dance. In terms of sources, these two community radio stations also include information written by those involved in the station, which brings into question why editors' usage of content written by members of the station is questioned.

I would like to emphasise that Outreach Radio and their sister station are not minor stations, as in order to have been on the same DAB multiplex as competitors and be on the Now South Hampshire DAB multiplex, Outreach Radio would have to have a commercial DSP license, which it does. In order for clarification, I have cited proof of this from OfCom's website [2]. It is also worth noting that Outreach Radio and Outreach Dance, as mentioned in their articles, were the first stations to join the UK Radio Portal[3], the first and only Hybrid Broadcast Broadband TV station to provide multiple radio stations on a single Freeview Play channel.

I would like to address my speculation that @Flip Format may have had an undeclared COI that those involved in the discussion may have not been aware of, and that it is extremely uncanny that Outreach Radio is questioned for its integrity and notability as a regional service to the people of Hampshire, just as the station begins its transtion from Local DAB to multiple Small-scale DAB multiplexes, which technically speaking puts the station under a slightly different, but no less relevant, coverage area to its competitors on the regional DAB multiplex. Various factors including the increased coverage into towns that the Now South Hampshire multiplex does not cover, such as Salisbury and Basingstoke, is the station's reasoning for this change [4], however it seems that Outreach Radio's notability as a result of this is put under scrutiny, despite competitors such as Nation Radio UK using the same methods as Outreach Radio for their increased coverage. The proposed removal of this Wikipedia article also appears to be an attempt to damage/reduce the credibility of this radio station, versus the other corporate-owned radio stations that would remain.

Should the mention of Outreach Radio, Outreach Dance, or their partnership with Peter Symonds College on Wikipedia ever be questioned for its integrity, notability, or relevance to local and regional radio in Hampshire, I would like to remind readers of this discussion once more that Outreach Radio Ltd. remains the only independently-run company based in Hampshire with station coverage comparable to that of commercial competitors, and deleting this article would create a bias in favour of the corporate conglomerates by listing their radio stations, their predecessors, and their history only. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 22:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop accusing other editors of having an "undeclared COI". WP:AGF. Flip Format (talk) 10:26, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not, I'm just justifying why I had mentioned it in the first place. Besides, my concern for this is equally relevant to this discussion as I would like to respectfully point out my concern for your tendency to want to see lots of articles deleted, and I feel that I am within my rights to respectfully challenge this. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 10:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as what we have delved into within this discussion it would probably be preferred by many if we continued the discussion of @Flip Format's activities on their talk page, I would prefer we focus on the discussion of the main topic at hand, that being Outreach Radio and Outreach Dance's notability and whether they should remain as pages on Wikipedia, and I would like to invite any external contributors who have seen this discussion so far to contribute, so it does not remain a discussion between a select few. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 10:50, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re "WP:NRADIO did not make it as a guideline", from that page:

==== Broadcast radio stations ====

A licensed broadcast radio station must meet the general notability guideline. It is likely to do so if it fulfills both of the following:

Has an established broadcasting history: the station must have been constructed, begun broadcasting, and received its permanent operating authorization from the relevant authority, not merely having been authorized for construction.
Originates (or has originated) at least some of its own programming.

As far as I'm aware, Outreach Radio is compliant with both of those requirements. Maybe I misunderstood you - are you saying that WP:NRADIO is not a valid set of guidelines?

It is broadcast 24x7x365 from Winchester, Basingstoke, Portsmouth, and Salisbury Small-Scale DAB multiplexes (a population coverage of 400k+ people - Ofcom, indoor coverage figures). (Salisbury, as of very recently - the page needs to be updated!).

It's a self-supporting radio station in the South of England. I have no idea of it's listening figures. Do you think it's of insufficient interest to warrant a presence on Wikipedia? Samuraibrian (talk) 20:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BCASTOUTCOMES. Flip Format (talk) 11:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re WP:BCASTOUTCOMES regarding the guidelines that this page SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 11:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...I pressed enter before I finished typing! As I was saying...

Re WP:BCASTOUTCOMES and the criteria it has, a response to each one that applies to Outreach Radio:

==== Broadcast media ====

The general notability guideline is the guideline of import for determining the notability of broadcast media outlets, per a 2021 RfC.

Licensed broadcast radio and TV stations are generally deleted if they lack significant coverage in reliable sources.

Some sources are from Outreach Radio's website, however this can be changed with non-COI websites, such as Wohnort [5]

If a station is devoted to the rebroadcast of another service, it should be redirected to that page or to a list of such stations; if not, or if it rebroadcasts multiple services and thus has no adequate target, a redirect to a list of stations in a region may be considered as an alternative to deletion.

All programming is original, so this should not be an issue.

In regards specifically to the sources used on the page, I will now update them with non-COI websites, however following this change is there still an issue that warrants it for deletion? SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 12:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BCASTOUTCOMES is clear that the WP:GNG is the main criterion when determining the notability of a radio station for Wikipedia. It is well worth reading the GNG. Sites such as Wohnort (which simply lists all DAB radio stations in the world) do not make the cut - coverage needs to be independent, reliable and significant, ie not an entry in a list of radio stations.

On a related note, Wikipedia isn't here for you to use to promote your own thing - see WP:NOTYOU. You, User:Samuraibrian and undeclared WP:COI editor User:OsmanSC all exist here pretty much entirely to edit the pages on Outreach Radio and related matters. Flip Format (talk) 14:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. - Surely Wohnort is suitable as a source since it is a "list" of all world-wide DAB stations, as well as being "independent of the subject"?

As for Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, we're not trying to recruit people to join the station, merely updating it with coverage-related information that is relevant to the history of the station. Nor is it an opinion piece or scandal mongering, as it has no topics relating to that sort of content.

I understand that self-promotion and advertising is an issue, but surely the efforts we have made to make sure all information is from content not written by any of us or someone we know still makes the page relevant enough to keep on Wikipedia? SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wohnort is a list of all DAB radio stations in the world - it does not count as significant coverage. Significant coverage in a reliable and independent source would be something like articles specifically about Outreach Radio (ie not just mentioning it in passing) in a newspaper or radio trade publication. I'm not going to reply further here as this is a space for the AfD discussion. Flip Format (talk) 15:53, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A slight side note, but have noticed you have been involved in another radio-related article deletion that you have submitted for deletion twice.

Re Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Kirk (presenter) (2nd nomination), I do have to say I agree with @Rillington regarding your mass article cull. If you don’t mind me asking, is there a COI on your end that we should be aware of, considering your involvement in the deletion so many radio-related Wikipedia pages, particularly radio stations and presenters? SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 16:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. Flip Format (talk) 17:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If Wohnort is not considered significant coverage to justify its use of a source, why did you, rather than flagging the article for deletion, not search for significant sources to replace them? SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 20:59, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the process of nominating for AfD is WP:BEFORE. I did search for significant coverage of this topic prior to nomination and was unable to find any. I'm not going to engage further here to answer general questions on Wikipedia policy, as this space is for the AfD discussion on the article. I will say that I don't think you are using the encyclopedia in good faith - please read WP:SPA. Flip Format (talk) 09:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern, and would like to point out that since you have nominated this article for AfD, I have been in the process of adding more credible sources to support information regarding certain topics that are included - not just Wohnort. This has resulted in becoming an incredibly arduous process, however it is slowly being updated with relevant sources that are either from non-COI websites that have been used prior to the nomimation, or are more than just a passing mention. I would like to also point out that everyone you have discussed with so far during this discussion are fairly new to Wikipedia, and for that reason have not contributed that heavily to the encyclopedia as a whole. Please read WP:DNB and WP:DCASAS. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 15:59, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I fully explained my reasons for 'having a go' at creating a Wikipedia page, in reply to User:Drmies on my User page.

Apart from the bot welcomes & invitations, and suchlike, I have found the process intimidating, not to say discouraging. That, alone, is the reason I have not contributed further content to Wikipedia. Samuraibrian (talk) 15:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: A well researched article with plenty of independent references. Rillington (talk) 02:24, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Article has been WP:REFBOMBed by COI editors (the directors of the radio station and a friend) with lots of passing mentions, entries in directories like Wohnort, repeated references to the same page over and over and no WP:SIGCOV. They have also attempted to do the same with this AfD, flooding it with lengthy screeds in an attempt to stifle the vote. Flip Format (talk) 07:26, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If entries such as Wohnort are still an issue, it should be noted that they are also supported by other reliable sources that convey the same information needed to support the article. Following this comment I have now removed the sources from Wohnort and replaced them with more reliable sources that are from the operators of the Small-Scale DAB multiplexes in question (to clarify further this is not another COI as I have no connection with the multiplex operators). It should also be noted that only three of the sources used in the entire article are used more than once, which I have personally seen to be the case on many Wikipedia entries. My main statement (top of this discussion) clarifies all the questions raised in this discussion so far and fully justifies the need for this article. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 13:55, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am pleased that you have found independent sources and this does remove potential COI, and COI is a reasonable concern to make about any article. I would also like to add that I do not think that the article is written in a way which makes it look like an advertisement for the station. Instead I consider it to be written in a way which gives a good, independent and well referenced history of the development of the station. Rillington (talk) 05:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add my thoughts to this. Myself and many people I know listen to this station with it being the only proper source of local information with all the other stations being bland corporates operating at a national network. Outreach Radio is the one station that is bucking this trend and it looks clear to me that the comments put here to try and get this removed have been done by someone working for these corporates against this fantastic local station. If you look at other pages that he has tried to remove it is fairly clear! This should absolutely remain on Wikipedia! Thesaintsouthampton (talk) 19:44, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

— Thesaintsouthampton (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Flip Format (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is true - It is possible that Thesaintsouthampton is one of our listeners (a pure assumption based on the fact that their user is a reference to one of the local football teams in our coverage area, Southampton FC), as presenters on Outreach Radio have mentioned this discussion on air, allowing listeners to look into it if they wish to do so. I find it very concerning that your immediate response to this person's comment is based purely on the fact that they are a new user, and that you find it necessary to discredit their contribution on this basis and assume they are a single-purpose account. Please read WP:DNB and WP:DCASAS, assume good faith and remember that Wikipedia is a volunteer service, and you should not be targeting new users based on their contributions, or lack thereof. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 09:30, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I want to make it clear that I an also advocating for the article on Outreach Dance to be kept. Rillington (talk) 04:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete an ice skating event and the Google Assistant ref are representative of how non-notable this is. Brief mentions in an article about something else is not how we define notability. Nothing found for RS. Oaktree b (talk) 15:00, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The ice skating event was organised and conducted by the radio station and was their first outdoor "event" of this nature - if this not being a notable part of the station's history, it can be omitted from the article. As for the Google Assistant ref, that's me justifying the mention of Google Assistant with that particular source - it doesn't have to be there. In terms of reliability all sources are there to back up the mention of the specific topic on the article and mention Outreach Radio in a sufficient enough way that it is completely impartial. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 18:18, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: An impartial and reliable documentation of the only fully-independent regional radio station in Hampshire, with plenty of research and independent sources - see comments above relist for more info. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 18:22, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

— SpokOfMinecraft (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Flip Format (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is true - Though I have had this account for over 8 years, and effectively have been a "lurker" (to save for a better description) until now, I would like to also emphasise that as a young user of Wikipedia I find it very disheartening to be targeted and victimised in this manner, despite having good intentions. Please read WP:DNB, WP:HA and WP:DCASAS. SpokOfMinecraft (talk) 22:49, 11 April 2023 (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.