Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ron & Don Show

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) Erik9 (talk) 21:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ron & Don Show[edit]

Unreamarkable regional radio show in Seattle. Not syndicated to other stations. єmarsee ^(Discuss) 06:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and I wrote the article. The entry for Luke Burbank is about a local radio host on this same station that has fewer listeners than this show so please delete that one, too. To not delete that one would be horribly confusing and and hypocritical and would cause other contributors to repeatedly add the article for the Ron & Don Show when they see that less popular hosts on this local radio station have articles about them.User:notabilitypatrol

Comment: 1. Ratings are not the issue here, notability is. Per WP:Notability_(media)#Programming, a purely local radio show is less likely to be notable than a regional or national one, but the question (as it is for all notability debates) is still "the presence or absence of reliable sources." I'm currently on the fence about whether there is enough such independent coverage of Ron & Don to justify notability. I don't live in Seattle and I have no independent interest in or knowledge about this show. However, these guys seem to have been around a long time and to have worked together in a lot of markets. In addition to the usual routine mentions you'd expect in the Seattle press, Google turns up some newspaper mentions of them getting hired and fired in those other markets. Some of this is at pay sites, so I didn't read those in detail, and it's not a huge number of hits, but there certainly are some. There is a substantial blog post by the TV columnist for the New Orleans Times Picayune, about a remote broadcast these guys did in NOLA last year in connection with some Hurricane Katrina fundraising. It's not clear if they were in the print T-P or not. ("Live from New Orleans: It's Seattle talk radio!" Times-Picayune blog post, April 10, 2008.) Is this enough? I'm not sure.

2. However, the comment above by User:Notabilitypatrol may raise concern that this particular article is an exercise in WP:POINT. User:Notabilitypatrol created this article, but now he/she readily agrees it should be deleted? Is the purpose to tell us about The Ron & Don Show, or to wage a battle against the much more notable (if lower rated) Luke Burbank?

3. By the way, the Google search also turned up a number of uses of "Ron & Don Show" as a nickname for CBC's famous Hockey Night in Canada and its Coach's Corner segment, hosted by Don Cherry and Ron MacLean. But I imagine User:Emarsee knows more about this than I do, eh?

--Arxiloxos (talk) 04:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully must disagree. It is absolutely impossible to completely separate notability from broadcast ratings when speaking about broadcast personalities as the former is a function of the latter. The hosts of the #1 rated radio program in a market, by virtue of that fact, must be as notable or more notable than the hosts of the #16 rated program in the same market. One of the criteria for entertainer notability is "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following." In light of that, if 110,000 people hear Ron & Don broadcast daily and only 19,000 people hear Luke Burbank broadcast daily it would be a tenuous assertion to claim that Luke Burbank is more notable than Ron & Don. --User:notabilitypatrol —Preceding undated comment was added on 06:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:04, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Redirect to KIRO (AM)~~ Luke Burbank was an established host for the national NPR network should there should be no issue with his article here at all, his notability as a radio host is confirmed. As for the subject of this article, it can easliy be merged with the article about their radio station. Nate • (chatter) 01:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--I disasgree; he hosted - for 5 weeks - a now-canceled and short-lived radio show that was carried in 13 small markets for less than a year. This gives him no special notability. If anything, his articles should be completely purged. They're currently serving as self-esteem/vanity vehicles and, based on a history of the primary contributor(s) to each article, the possibility exists that they may, in fact, be self-edited. Bill Handel hosts the top-rated local radio show in America in Los Angeles and also a weekend radio show syndicated to 400 stations. He only has a single article, covering both himself and his shows. This is not an isolated example. How can we justify giving this Burbank fellow individual entries for each of his various, small projects? Notabilitypatrol (talk) 08:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Thank you, this is certainly a possible solution, although I am still open to thinking that these guys deserve their own article, especially given their long history together in multiple markets. A question and a comment: (1) If we did merge this into the radio station article, how much (if any) of the content of the existing Ron & Don Show article would you think should be included in the KIRO article? (2) Also, since the KIRO articles indicate that simulcasting is ending and the AM station is switching to all-sports soon while the FM is keeping the talk format, I guess the redirect (if we agree this is best) should be to KIRO-FM.--Arxiloxos (talk) 02:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, thanks for bringing that up, I didn't know about the April conversion. Redirect to KIRO-FM then. I'm thinking a condensed synopsis of each of the hosts on the station would work well. Nate • (chatter) 02:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind a concise summary of the hosts on the KIRO-FM article. I support User:Mrschimpf's proposal to merge that page to into the KIRO article. єmarsee ^(Discuss) 04:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like an acceptable solution in lieu of the various vanity pages that currently exist. I would ask for exceptions for Dave Ross and Dori Monson (since each host nationally or regionally syndicated programs in addition to their local shows - Ross as fill-in for Charles Osgood on CBS and Monson as host of "Hawk Talk") and Tom Douglas as his radio gig is secondary to his work as a chef. Perhaps we could maintain dedicated pages for each of those and give Upshaw, O'Neil, Burbank and Van Der Vort a 3-4 sentence biographical summary on the KIRO pages? Notabilitypatrol (talk) 09:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, this AfD relates only to the article Ron & Don Show in its current condition. Other articles have to be evaluated on their own merits, after giving proper notice to interested editors.--Arxiloxos (talk) 15:04, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I object to the deletion of this article until some objective standard for determining the notability of a local radio show is established. Regardless of the fact these are two separate articles, this point cannot be separated: it is irreconcilable for an encyclopedia to use a non-objective standard for determining notability. We can't pretend there is not linkage. This is probably more appropriate for the WikiRadio project but, in the short-term, I've placed a rough numerical rating scale that could be used for objective determination of notability on my talk page to stimulate discussion and would invite input or discussion.

Notabilitypatrol (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia already has an article on objective standards for determining notability. To create a new system would be superfluous. We are discussing if the article "Ron & Don Show" meets notability using Wikipeida guidelines, not your own system. --Nathalmad (talk) 08:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's objective standards are of a broad and general nature and don't resolve the specific impasse created by the subjective standards being applied by two distinct groups editing two objectively interconnected articles. Your participation here would be better appreciated if done in a congenial and proactive way. Don't you agree? I'm sure you do. Notabilitypatrol (talk) 11:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If you wish to change Wikipedia's standards, please discuss it in the appropriate place, and not in a discussion relating to a deletion of an article. єmarsee • Speak up! 18:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not wish to change Wikipedia's standards; I wish to establish an objective codification of the standards being made-up on-the-fly by selected persons in this specific discussion relating to the deletion of an article about a topic that is comparatively more notable than another article on a related topic; precedent is germane to establishing notability - comparison is incumbent to precedent -- Notabilitypatrol (talk) 18:52, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep They've been in enough markets for a period of time to generate at least some significant coverage in multiple sources, even though it is sparse: While at KTCT in the San Francisco Bay Area, in 1999 the Contra Costa Times reported "Djs Raise $25,000 For Shot Man"; in 2001, The Dallas Morning News reported them being let go from KYNG-FM in "The Ron & Don Show' reaches end of the road" and commented on it further in "DJ flies off the handlebars; Ron & Don had a unique chance for a good cause, but blew it"; the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported about another charity event, a Canadian-border-to-Mexican-border bike ride for breast cancer, in Ron and Don keep charity's wheels turning, and ironically it was this bike ride they were on when they were fired from KYNG-FM, which the Star-Telegram commented on in "Ron and Don: gone and gone". DHowell (talk) 21:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Mrschimpf's suggestion of a redirect, with some piece of this content to be included at the station's page, is certainly a well-considered proposal. But on balance, I think Ron & Don have enough notability to earn their own page. This has been a significant show in multiple markets for a number of years, and there is coverage in secondary sources. That's really enough, but then one might add an additional argument based on ratings. I certainly don't agree that a show with better ratings is automatically more notable than one with lower ratings, and there is no doubt whatsoever that a show with low ratings is nevertheless notable if it has the requisite presence of reliable sources. However, popularity can be one indicium of notability, to be considered along with the other indicia. In this case, if Ron & Don have maintained high ratings in Seattle, an important American market (both in size and culturally), it does add another element to the overall case that their show is sufficiently notable.--Arxiloxos (talk) 04:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I vote keep. It would be bizarre and weird for the 29th highest ranked show in Seattle to have 2 wikipedia pages (1 for the show and 1 for the host) while the 3rd highest rated show didn't even have one. I think the nomination of this article for deletion was probably done by people who have some kind of beef or issue with the show. Notabilitypatrol (talk) 09:46, 28 February 2009 (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.