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 redirect to WAPA-TV. As noted by User:Bearcat, the discussion of TV stations in WP:NMEDIA is explicit about what to do with this type of station. Since all the recreation is being done by IPs, I will semi-protect; this can be upped to a higher level if the problem persists. RL0919 (talk) 03:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WTIN-TV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No significant coverage. Fails WP:NTV. TV listings alone do not satisfy notability. Also courtesy pinging @Rosguill, Bankster, and Red Phoenix to this discussion as other users that have dealt with the repeated recreations. Jalen Folf (talk) 03:21, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Jalen Folf (talk) 03:21, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. Jalen Folf (talk) 03:21, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, nowhere near GNG. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 03:29, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with WNJX-TV. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not really much here in terms of content, and clearly not meeting GNG. I was fine with the redirect, but given all the recreation, keeping the redirect would also have to mean either semi protection or ECP on that redirect. Red Phoenix ^talk 04:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to WAPA-TV. Per WP:NMEDIA, television "stations" which exist only as relays of other television stations, and do not originate any of their own programming, are not "inherently" notable enough for their own standalone articles — which is precisely why this has been stable for years as a redirect to WAPA, and only just got converted into a standalone article within the past two weeks. Deleting it outright would still most likely require protection, because open redlinks are even more vulnerable to recreation than redirects are, so the idea that we might have to protect the redirect is not really a reason to privilege deletion over restoration of the redirect. Bearcat (talk) 18:08, 13 January 2020 (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.