Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BizTalkRadio

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. Closing this as Delete due to the absence of any sources that provide SIGCOV. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BizTalkRadio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Subject does not contain the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 03:18, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Business. Let'srun (talk) 03:18, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't not know why this is up for deletion but I vote keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmtvfan (talk • contribs) 03:49, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:09, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: There are issues with the article, but the first course of action should be to correct those instead of deletion. Stereorock (talk) 21:38, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Would those arguing to Keep please sign their comments and point out which sources provide SIGCOV as asked by the nominator?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Not sure what the keep votes are referring to because I have found zero significant coverage. Only a few namechecks in obscure radio blogs. C F A 💬 04:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: While a national radio network, it is lower-tier enough that significant coverage is unlikely to really exist. Undoubtedly a remnant of more existence-based inclusion standards (despite the lack of connection to, or not being, notability) that had not been shaken off in this topic area in 2012. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 23 August 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.