Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DWAD

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DWAD

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

No claim of notability, no evidence of notability through reliable sources that can be verified. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:32, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:14, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:14, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete B101 socks keep inserting DWAD as a affiliate of Mareco Broadcasting Network Bertrand's favorite targets --209.249.5.130 (talk) 22:20, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, possibly speedy per WP:G5. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Likely if DWAD was already affiliated by Mareco Broadcasting Network an LTA target of Bertrand101 I request G5 by Bertrand101 in violation of a block or ban --209.249.5.130 (talk) 03:57, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While the sources here certainly provide nominal verification that this exists, they fail to adequately verify one of the core notability criteria for radio stations: that it actually originates any portion of its own programming, rather than existing merely as a pure rebroadcaster of another radio service. We have a tremendous problem with articles about radio stations in the Philippines not properly complying with WP:NMEDIA's notability and sourcing requirements — it's not being able to verify that the thing exists that gets it an article, it's being able to reliably source that it meets the notability criteria. Bearcat (talk) 18:52, 12 August 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.