Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/600 AM Montreal

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 redirect to CINW. MBisanz ^talk 01:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

600 AM Montreal[edit]

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

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

Delete. Articles about two proposed radio stations which received license approval in 2013 but have still not launched as of today; WP:NMEDIA, however, requires a station to have an established broadcast history (i.e. actually be operating) before it qualifies for an article. The added issue here is that the actual launch of these stations is now very unlikely; their approvals expire in November, but just over a week ago the Montreal Gazette's media-beat journalist wrote on his personal blog that he could find no indication of the kind of business activity that would actually have to be happening right now to get the stations launched by November. (I'll spare y'all the gory details for brevity's sake, but you can go here if you really need to know. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/850 AM Montreal, the other license the same company got in 2013 for which they've already blown the expiry date.) Situations like this are why NMEDIA doesn't confer notability on as yet unlaunched stations; it's actually not as rare as one might think for a licensed new station to never launch and have its license expire. In the increasingly unlikely event that the company actually pulls it off, we can restore and update these articles when that time comes -- but as long as they remain unlaunched, it's WP:TOOSOON. Bearcat (talk) 00:38, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 00:42, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 00:42, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Yes, Fagstein (that is indeed his blog name, aka Steve Faguy) is pretty clear on the non-notability/non-existence, at this time. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Station only existed "on paper" and did not actually broadcast. As such, article does not meet NMEDIA or GNG. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:03 on August 14, 2016 (UTC)
Delete; these stations have not gone on the air, and all indications thus far indicate that the authorizations will expire before they ever do. (They still haven't even been assigned call letters…) Even in a large market such as Montreal, stations that have never broadcast anything don't enjoy the presumption of notability that is assumed for a station that has operated. If somehow the stations do get built and sign on, we can have articles on them… but I'm not holding my breath. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Oh, my favourite part of it all is how they still don't even own the transmitter site yet...good luck getting that in order, and all the other stuff that would still have to happen at the transmitter site to make it ready for reuse given that it's been dormant for six years, in just three months!) Bearcat (talk) 04:23, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, someone may want to redirect to CINW. For 66 years, that was CFCF-AM radio, and it was widely known as "AM 60," as one can see in this old TV spot for a typical Montreal preoccupation. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:47, 14 August 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.