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 speedy keep per invalid nomination and that the article has been well sourced. (non-administartive closure) -- RyRy5 (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get The Fuck Up Radio[edit]

Get The Fuck Up Radio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

this article should be deleted, it is on a non notable "internet" radio show. There are no impartial secondary sources, there are no sources apart from the radio show itself. The show does not meet the criteria for inclusion of media organization. There are no ratings figures. There is probably more wrong with it too. SuperSuperBoi (talk) 03:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:N. ~ Ameliorate _{U T} @ 03:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. —Dravecky (talk) 05:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep as the nomination is invalid given that it has long included several cites for in-depth coverage in reliable secondary sources, ratings are not a determining factor for Wikipedia inclusion, and "There is probably more wrong with it too." is just, wow. This is the latest in a string of invalid deletion nominations from this editor. - Dravecky (talk) 05:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep. Nothing has changed since the last AFD. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 14:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep on account of invalid nomination that makes numerous false claims about the article content and sources. The previous AFD had two administrators stating this article was sourced enough to assert notability. SashaNein (talk) 22:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep reasonably well sourced. Seems resonably notable as well.--Rtphokie (talk) 00:26, 5 June 2008 (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.