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.
Non-notable Internet radio station per WP:WEB. No references or sources. Contested prod. RJASE1Talk 16:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Station isn't even broadcasting any more, per article.Keep but source this article better; the new references which establish notability are not adequately incorporated into the article, and I have tagged it as such. ObtuseAngle 16:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do not delete. A few reputable references have been added. Station may not be broadcasting, but had a noteworthy impact on the industry, thus has grounds for inclusion. Additionally, more than 1,300 results found on Google when searching the term "makradio". Internetfignewton 17:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.58.71.75 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 1 March 2007. — 71.58.71.75 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Delete-- article is promotional and self-serving, and much of the information about "awards" is incorrect and/or deceptive (two alleged "awards" mentioned in the article don't even exist as per se awards). As with many independent internet radio stations, particularly a bevy at Live365 and/or iTunes, there was no major or "noteworthy impact on the industry," or at least it would be more comforting to see specific empirical examples of things this station did that numerous other internet -based broadcasters DIDN'T do, have or accomplish. In fact, there are numerous longer-term independents at Live365 and iTunes alone (not to mention on other networks) that have more aggregate tuning hours, that got more involved in the community there, that lasted longer, that sacrificed both time and money in the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel hearings and other major historical events that developed the industry, etc. This one broadcast for a while... it got its share of listeners and a little publicity... then it went away. Welcome to the club of thousands of other such stations.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.57.33.217 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 4 March 2007. — 66.57.33.217 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Do not delete. The article as I see introduces facts and nothing more. They do not say, "this is the greatest station ever" or anything like that. While it does not exist anymore, significant information has been provided to show that they were well recognized while in existence. I would argue that those who use to listen may want to know what happened and/or what they are doing now. Just because a company goes out of business or a person of history dies, we do not erase them from the history books. This station was obviously more than just a flash in the fire. It appears from the article that those who were involved moved onto other stations as well. According to the articles history page, this article has been on Wikipedia since 2005, that too, should mean something. I say leave it here, its not doing any harm. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.58.71.75 (talk) 14:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC).— 71.58.71.75 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep per the new non-trivial references (particularly the first two). In response to a comment, that the article is "promotional", I would like to note that the station is now defunct. What's the point in promoting it? Any misleading or POV-ish statements about awards or anything else can be excised from the article without having to delete it entirely. -- Black Falcon 08:40, 7 March 2007 (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.