Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WOCW-LD

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 List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. as a viable ATD with a slightly stronger consensus than WQCW. This can be changed, however, as a matter of editorial discretion Star Mississippi 14:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WOCW-LD[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)

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV from secondary sources. Article was part of a bulk AfD last year that closed as no consensus but there isn't much to show this meets the notability guidelines on its own. Let'srun (talk) 02:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and West Virginia. Let'srun (talk) 02:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Established broadcast channel. Standards for source frequency on articles about media outlets should be much looser since media doesn’t tend to cover media. WilsonP NYC (talk) 03:01, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or possibly redirect to WQCW. The argument above has fallen way out of favor, including at an RfC. WHCP had issues getting its signal into Charleston, yet there is no coverage even mentioning this translator for some reason in Charleston newspapers. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.: its pre-2015 history as a WQCW relay is a bit more than your average DTV America/HC2/Innovate station, but not much (since that incarnation would not have been independently notable), and of course the supposedly-limited operations since then are the usual national networks, no local content, and no significant coverage — but it's barely enough for me to at least consider retaining the page history behind a redirect. It's another technical survivor of a bulk nomination from last year. As for the notion of media outlets having looser standards: we tried that, and the eventual result was a 2021 RfC that pretty much confirmed that the GNG is the notability barometer, not NMEDIA. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty sure that discusion ended without a clear consensus. WilsonP NYC (talk) 11:39, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. Its notability as a WQCW translator is easily noted in that article, but as Gray sold it for a pittance knowing that DTVA wouldn't come close to being a competitor, and the station's low sale price is truly the only thing of note. Gray likely knew that the station's viability once it moved the WQCW transmitter to WSAZ's stick would be nil to none (this was before they started programming subchannel networks of their own), and DTVA wouldn't be competitive at all since it can only serve Charleston proper due to the area's geography. Nate • (chatter) 00:25, 25 January 2024 (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.