Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk Media News

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. Kurykh (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Media News

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

Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails Wikipedia's general notability guidelines and WP:NORG. I find lots of stuff by them but nothing about them. Most of the claims of significance are now marked as failing verification. This is a strategy often used by undisclosed paid promotional editors to get their articles to 'stick'. Jbh ^Talk 01:51, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A radio programming service doesn't get a Wikipedia article the moment it becomes possible to nominally verify that it exists; it gets an article when it's substantively the subject of media coverage about it. But of the three sources here, one is the founder's own primary source biography on the website of her principal employer, one is a glancing namecheck of the service's existence in a press release about Lord Dampnut's meeting itinerary for January 25, and the third is a glancing namecheck of the service's existence in the captions to a couple of soundbites in a mass survey of the entire White House press corps — so the two sources that are independent aren't substantive, and I'm not finding anything on a Google News search that supports notability more solidly. Bearcat (talk) 15:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note. Per the HighBeam search there are numerous references to the company providing sole radio coverage of the US President roughly every 10 days, which is consistent with the size of the radio contingent of the White House press corps. By its very nature, however, pool coverage is circulated internally among outlets covering the president and audio and notes gathered by the pool are often used by newsrooms without attribution. In the White House briefing room, the company now occupies the back-row left seat of Talk Radio News Service, which no longer operates a website. Both firms were founded by Ellen Ratner and appear to have similar business models. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mercuryblued (talk • contribs) 22:03, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No in depth coverage in independent sources. 331dot (talk) 16:35, 9 February 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.