Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radio Timperley (2nd nomination)

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. Procedural keep. (non-admin closure) f e minist 13:08, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Timperley

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

Not notable. Fuddle (talk) 23:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep You wanted to merge it a few hours ago, now you want to delete it? Pursue what was suggested in the first nom; this is a second nomination that was put up too soon. Nate • (chatter) 23:32, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I used twinkle. I've never had a problem before. Fuddle (talk) 01:09, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. You only just proposed a merge, which is obviously more appropriate than deletion. --Michig (talk) 05:50, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:17, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Close discussion. There's obviously no serious or reliably sourced basis to keep this as a standalone article topic separately from Chris Sievey, but AFD isn't the place to propose a merger, which is what the nominator did the first time — and the moment that discussion was closed for being in the wrong venue, the nominator immediately initiated this discussion. Just close this discussion and do the merger thang. Bearcat (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep: per Nate. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:39, 25 May 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.