Talk:Triple M Dubbo

Untitled

I am branching out a link from this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_FM that otherwise had no further information.

I'm under the impression that all licensed radio stations are inherently notable, and this speedy should be removed. However, I'm checking with a very radio-knowledgeable admin to see if that's so. Please do not delete in the interim. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:35, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Shawn is correct that under notability guidelines for media, the two basic requirements that a radio station generally has to meet to qualify for an article are (a) that it's licensed by the appropriate regulatory authority, and (b) that it originates at least a portion of its own programming in its own studios (so as to prevent people from writing separate articles about each individual rebroadcaster of a single programming service). This one does seem to meet both of those criteria, so at the very least it isn't speediable as written.

However, that said, "inherent notability" is not an exemption from content policies — an article about an "inherently notable" topic can still be deleted if it isn't properly referenced — and the media notability guideline does still permit individual stations' articles to be merged into a parent article on the network if there isn't very much that can really be said about the station(s) as distinct topics.

So my question for anybody with some knowledge of Australian radio would be as follows: are there any good sources that can be used to properly flesh out this and other articles about individual Star FM stations, so that they look less like the current version of this article and more like 2WZD? Or would they be better served by having a single article about Star FM which the individual call signs just redirect to? Bearcat (talk) 02:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)