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. WP:SOFTDELETE Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CT-20[edit]

CT-20 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Delete. Poorly sourced article about a radio program. As a syndicated show that aired across an ad hoc network of stations rather than in a single market, this would pass WP:NMEDIA if it were properly sourced -- but the only source cited here is an archived version of its own primary source web page about itself, which is not a source that can confer notability. No strong media coverage is locatable on either Google or ProQuest, either. As always, a radio show is not entitled to a Wikipedia article just because its own website verifies that it existed; an article has to rest on media coverage about the show to become keepable. Bearcat (talk) 17:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2016 (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.