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. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 15:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KCC LIVE[edit]

Non notable school radio station. The article makes no claim to notability and reads like an advert/name check. No sources have been provided Nuttah68 17:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right - it should be speedily deleted. Its format has been copied from that of BBC Radio Merseyside and is not at all notable. --172.142.0.137 21:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - A format copy is not a copyvio. There are no grounds for speedy deletion. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 23:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The radio station is useful information. I work at KCC LIVE presenting and producing. If you want sources for the information; please contact the office via email (office@kcclive.com) or the website (www.kcclive.com) or the MySpace (www.myspace.com/kcclive. I would like to also add that that User 172.142.0.137 should be banned due to persistant vandalism of the KCC LIVE Wikipedia. The KCC LIVE Wikipedia is viewed by a varity of people everyday, from children to adults, so there is no need to post pornography on the site.

If you want evidence of this - please consult the history of the KCC LIVE Wikipedia and you will see that User 172.142.0.137 has vandelised the page with pornographic material.

If you want to contact me, please leave me a message either on Wikipedia or at office@kcclive.com

Jakeyross 22:58, 16 May 2007 — Jakeyross (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

No pornography was posted, they are images used from other Wikipedia articles posted on your page, allegorical of the fact that what you post is also just a load of shit. --172.142.0.137 07:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - According to the edit history, there was indeed pornography posted on the article at one time. Further, do not make personal attacks against anybody here. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article is self-referenced, as it displays no reliable sources independant of the organisation and/or its employees. Only claim for notability, "one of the best student stations", is subjective and unsourced. Fails to meet the notability guideline for organisatins, groups, and companies, the use of reliable sources guideline, or the verifiability policy, and as such should be deleted. -- saberwyn 23:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. Article is a mess of POV with statements such as "one of the best student stations", reads like a promotional piece, fails WP:N and WP:V, and is also suffering from conflict-of-interest-itis. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 23:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A7 Orderinchaos 05:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No "vote" -- IMHO, the discussion (and apparent conflict) above reads to me like a manufactured entity, intended to make people think that the article has some notability, which would lead me to think delete. but I shall leave decisions to those wiser than me (i.e. the Cabal) -- 195.92.40.49

Some people are so sad and petty. This article is valid. GET OVER IT! Why delete something that is valid? Go get a girlfriend/boyfriend, along with a life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.74.195 (talk)
- Please do not make personal attacks in attempting to prove validity of this article. If you wish to prove that this article can be upheld to our requirements, please see WP:N for notability, WP:V for verifiability, and WP:RS for what we consider to be reliable sources. You have not done this, you have only yelled and screamed - and yelling and screaming does not prove your article to be "valid". --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete it doesn't have anything that says it is notable in any way
Delete I am shocked that this hasn't been deleted already. It is evident that from the grammatical structure of the article, the author has obviously created this for a personal false sense of fame and self promotion.

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.