Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reprezent

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 no consensus. Kurykh (talk) 04:28, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reprezent

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

Non notable radio station, No evidence of notability, Fails RADIO & GNG (Also the article was more or less copied from [1] so better off blown up and rewritten too), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:34, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A TNT may be merited, but there is a demonstration of potential notability: a five-year license from Ofcom and transmitting on DAB to London. Someone more knowledgeable on British radio may be helpful here, but I do smell the potential for a keep with rewrite. Raymie (t • c) 03:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above the article was more or less copied from that one source which more or less makes this a copyvio anyway, Bizarrely I got no results for the station yesterday and yet today I get loads! so the station looks to be notable however the copyvio is my big concern - I could end this AFD and tag it with DB-copyvio but I'm hoping someone more knowledgable here can save this with a rewrite. –Davey2010^Talk 13:43, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 00:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 02:01, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article isn't notable and there doesn't seem to be enough secondary sources to establish a proper article. Denarivs (talk) 03:42, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Licenced broadcast stations tend to be treated as notable. Station is reasonably well known within Community Radio sector. However current state of article is poor, needs improvement rather than deletion. Philedmondsuk (talk) 21:14, 24 February 2017 (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.