Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:WWWJ-FM

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. Found not to be a blatant hoax, just undemonstrated verifiability. There is an unreconciliable split between whether it should be deleted as hopeless or kept to die a natural death. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:47, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:WWWJ-FM

This is a speedy declined by the creator. The article purports to describe a 94.7 FM radio station in Atlanta, which does not exist. (Atlanta has WUBL on 94.9, so there couldn't be one.) There is also no radio station with the call sign WWWJ at this time. This is a blatant hoax, no matter what the creator claims, and it should be deleted as unsuitable to become an encyclopedic article. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As stated in the article specifically, this station has not yet been added to a broadcasting tower but is in the process of doing such. Second of all, that isn't a government website. Rfmanradgh (talk) 17:44, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FCCData.org is a reliable aggregate of information from the FCC's database systems. That it is not directly operated by the agency is immaterial to the issue at hand. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 18:04, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The FCC records do not show this station exists, there is no WP:SIGCOV through reliable sources, the website used as a source for three of the four citations is very suspicious and Rfmanradgh, the author of the page, is claiming to own the station. Which, if it was the case, would be a massive WP:COI and he would have no business working on it. Support the speedy deletion as a hoax per nom. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 17:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If y'all beleive I am fake, you are highly encouraged to delete it. I am not a hoax and I don't need to prove it to a private non-profit. Rfmanradgh (talk) 19:13, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the station is for real, that's all well and good. But articles need to have reliable sources and significant coverage in the media to back up claims. You can't cite just the station's website and social media pages. Moreover, you can't write an article on something that you own. It's simple common sense. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 21:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The speedy was declined by user:Johnj1995, not the creator. I don't think it's a hoax as it does seem to exist online. It has no chance of being accepted in its present state, but we normally give drafts time to develop. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's the thing, it IS a hoax as it claims to be a physical radio station licensed by the Federal Communications Commission, and it clearly is not. Internet radio stations can have articles but if there's lots of SIGCOV to justify it, not by simply citing the website. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 00:02, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I never claimed to be licensed by the FCC. Rfmanradgh (talk) 00:11, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I highly stated and bolded in the article, it clearly states that it is not license by the FCC and is not publicly on radio currently. Rfmanradgh (talk) 00:13, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Licensed doesn't mean license with FCC, I just have a royalty license so far.. Rfmanradgh (talk) 00:20, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inasmuch as you made this edit a full two hours after this deletion request was posted by Sammi Brie (after previously claiming the station signed on at 94.7 FM on January 1, 2022) we do not do articles on terrestrial radio stations that don't exist, internet radio notwithstanding. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 00:26, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pawnkingthree: This is a topic area where it takes one search of 30 seconds or less to learn what's a hoax and what isn't. This isn't even the first draft G3 for this very reason: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:KFBG-TV (2nd nomination). An article on a nonexistent broadcast station has no chance of meeting the GNG by definition, and the vast, vast majority of internet stations are not notable at all. I can start an internet radio station and call it WSMM, but it takes one easy search to learn that there is no station that currently broadcasts with that call sign. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:11, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The above arguments appear to be about whether an article satisfies verifiability. But this is not an article. This is a draft. Drafts are not deleted on account of notability or verifiability. They are declined on account of notability and verifiability, and that is not the issue. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:21, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Robert McClenon. Draft MFDs are not a duplicate of article AFDs, and we allow some latitude for this.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:22, 1 July 2022 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.