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 of the debate was speedy delete as author request. Only two actual contributors both requested deletion; AfD was a snowball. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Possibly a hoax, but plausible enough to avoid a prod - page links to a real web site that references the same group (Jersey Shore Communications) listed as the owner, which really does exist but whose web site is being re-built, rendering it impossible to substantiate or disprove the claims made on the company's article. User:Mrschimpf wrote on my talk page: "I think this guy (User:UncleFloyd) is trying to pull our chain with a hoax here, he added the affilate to the CW list, but the second result in Google leads to WMCN, a home shopping-infomercial channel with no spare UPN/WB/Fox subchannels, at least looking at the TitanTV schedule page. Jersey Shore Communications also leads to a website with no navigation at all, and the article seems to make claims that are outrageous, a Google search with commas only leads to listings involving a burglar alarm company of the same name. The WWAC article copies the new Fox O&O logo and makes claims about WMGM that seem to be very unsubstanciated. I also suspect that WWACArtist would be one of his sockpuppets. ETA: It looks like UncleFloyd isn't really heavily involved, he just adjusted articles for readability, but still looking at things, there are a couple of new users trying to create trouble by creating fake TV stations for fun and to delude people into thinking that WWAC is real." User:WWACArtist is the creator of this page. Morgan Wick 04:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I am a media professional in the New York/New Jersey area and I have interviewed with the station. Hell, I even managed to Google WWAC and got relevant hits. I know they exist, hell I have even talked to them on the phone. WMCN has no relation, other than having had the same calls at one time. (WMCN was a new digital flash cut operation that was never broadcast in NTSC.) I can give you the phone number if you want it. I would not waste my time sending a demo tape and driving down to South Jersey for an interview at a non-existant station. The station is near Atlantic City, although that may have changed as I they had some sort of ownership change recently. As a media professional I love to see how non-professionals on Wikipedia have no idea even how to do proper research. It is grade school research you are doing not j-school. 05:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by UncleFloyd (talk • contribs)

• You must not have the same Google I have. The only two results I see on the first two Google pages for WWAC that have anything to do with TV refer to WMCN. A search for WWAC-TV, as far as I can tell, only gets results for WMCN on the first page (there are references to WWAC, but these appear to be old references to the now-WMCN). I find it hard to believe that a station that formerly used the calls could get results over a station that currently uses them. Can you link me to one of these "relevant hits"? PS: [1] does not show this station as a Fox affiliate, contrary to the claims in the article. Morgan Wick 05:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have seen some graphic work for the station on a design group's web portfolio for them and I am kicking myself now for not bookmarking it, but that was a year or two ago and I cannot recall the company. When the weather is right I can get Fox 53, albiet rather fuzzy here in northern Monmouth County. TV is one of the things I know about and there is a WWAC! I suppose that you are going to say that WYDC-TV diesn't exist either as its website on the Fox page you mention [2] says it is under development. I have also noticed that there are some errors and ommissions on the Fox site as well with regard to affilaites. You should also go call for some NBC affiliates deletion as there are some pages on their local stations page [3] that have outdated and/or inaccurate information. I can go there and find the errors and say the respective Wikipedia pages for the stations with the inaccurate information and call for there deletion because they aren't on NBC's list. TVXPert 05:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, the username is TVXPert, that must mean the user is a professional expert on the TV industry. Bwithh 06:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Possible sockpuppet of UncleFloyd or WWACArtist. You still haven't given us anything other than your own word that this station exists as claimed in the article. At least WYDC is listed on Fox's web site, it has that much going for it. Morgan Wick 05:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• WYDC does have a website [4], they just didn't link the main page to the index file. Nate 06:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My research doesn't have the resources of a media professional, but the articles for both the station and Jersey Shore Communications popped up only tonight, and from my experience a Fox affiliate established for three years would've been listed on Wikipedia by now. The logo shown for WWAC resembles the Fox Television Stations Group's new logo for their O&O stations, and I doubt at this point they would give permission to an affiliate station to use it before all their other stations established the logo.

A Google search under the parent company name leads to the company's website on top, however, there are more results in the 17 hits for Jersey Shore Communications & Alarm Systems than this company. The Channel 53 frequency went dark in 2003 as a power saving/cable carriage move and WWAC moved to digital 44, then changed calls to WMCN shortly thereafter. It is highly doubtful at this point that the FCC would allow a new channel to take over 53 as they're going to clear out all the spectrum above 51 after the full conversion for HD and sell it for mobile phone services. Atlantic City is also part of the Philadephia DMA and has WPSG already as their CW affiliate, it's a known fact that Philly signals are imported into Atlantic City via cable/dish.

Finally, the fact I cannot find any references to the station in B&C, TVWeek, (community name) Business Journal or CW/Fox PR announcements lead me to believe that this in addition to Jersey Shore Communications are fictional entities and this article should be pulled. Nate 06:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• How do you explain the website then? Also, quit emphasizing CW, the claim is that it's going to be on a digital subchannel. Don't cite WPSG, cite WTXF. Morgan Wick 06:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Should've cited WTXF more, sorry. My apologies. Checked whois for [5], and it leads me to GoDaddy as registrar, same with JSC. Don't most media companies use something more substantial than GoDaddy to register their domains? Nate 06:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom unless we can get some serious sourcing. For one thing, if Mr. Floyd's interviewed at the station, how about an address or telephone number? The FCC's own website has no information for this station as given. RGTraynor 06:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• WWAC in the FCC TV station database. The most damning piece of evidence yet. One entry, and it doesn't involve 53 or 9, the two channels referred to in the article. Morgan Wick 06:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• The hoaxer identified - Strong Delete WWAC-TV and Jersey Shore Communications
  • The Jersey Shore Communications website is registered to Millennia Broadcast Group (type in the number to access record) (Millennia has non-functional websites http://www.mbg1.net http://www.millenniabroadcast.com, just like Jersey Shore).
  • Google cache shows profile pages for founder of Millennia Broadcast which do not read like a professional corporate page
  • The founder mentioned on the cached page has a myspace page (claims Millennia Broadcast Group as his company near the bottom of the left hand column - scroll down).
• The founder of the company is 19 years old. He genuinely seems interested in the TV industry, as shown by his posts on TVnewstalk.net (where he claims to be a Weekend News Anchor for Millennia in his user profile). Millennia Broadcast Group may have done some real work for a teenage/high school local news program. But the WWAC/Jersey Shore hoax sites appear to be fantasies/attempts to pad his and his friends' resumes. Bwithh 06:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, speedily if poss, as hoax. -- GWO
• Delete as unreferenced hoax. Molerat 10:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Until more convincing proof of a hoax exists it should remain. Otherwise this is just another Wikijihad by some powermad assholes. FunkyChicken! 14:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your bar for believing something to be a hoax seems extraordinarily high (assuming you actually examined the evidence given above). Also, please read WP:CIVIL. Bwithh 16:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Allow me to quote from WP:V, which is official policy: "The burden of evidence lies with the editors who have made an edit or wish an edit to remain. Editors should therefore provide references. If an article topic has no reputable, reliable, third-party sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on that topic." We do not need to supply any more convincing proof than already has been done. It is now up to those wishing to keep this article to supply proof that this station exists. RGTraynor 16:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per above. ConeyCyclone 15:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment on Jersey Shore Communications Looking at its edit history, this article was created by User:Ngsantia. This Username is remarkably similar to the real name and myspace name of the person I suggest above to be the hoaxer Bwithh 16:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, this line makes no sense: "Jersey Shore Communications owns subsidiary television station groups Empire Media Holdings, LLC and Keystone Media Holdings, LLC, both of which are joint ventures with Kraft Foods and Procter & Gamble Co.". Two Holding companies which are also joint ventures simply for small scale TV station assets? The idea of Kraft and P&G investing in TV stations is also dubious. btw, I work in the financial industry and have carried out research projects on TV station acquisitions in the US. Bwithh 16:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete unless sourced more. Xyrael ^T 16:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Beyond which, try Googling the reporters this channel claims to have. Edris Jenkins has one Google hit (the aforementioned TVnewstalk.net [6], there are eight hits for their traffic reporter, five for their co-anchor (the lead hit of which is a Myspace page putting this 18-year-old in Oregon), and their alleged flagship show has a single unique hit from someone claiming to be interviewed on it. You would think that someone would have heard of this channel if it actually existed. RGTraynor 16:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - And for the piece de resistance (it's a slow day at work), the only "Jersey Shore Communications" in New Jersey (according to the state Commerce and Recording Services department) is a burglar alarm and telephone hookup outfit in Oceanport. Don't take my word for it; give them a call at (732) 542-5777 and ask whether they own a TV station. I've no doubt FunkyChicken! will apologize handsomely to us powermad types. RGTraynor 16:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unreferenced, unverified article about a supposed television station. The evidence above overwhelmingly indicates there is no FOX affiliate by this name. I can't find any evidence this station even exists other than as a memory fo what WMCN-TV once was. If someone can post verifiable reliably sourced information that this station in fact exists, I will reconsider... right now the burden of proof is on the originator though. Oh and WWAC-DT redirect should be deleted as part of this, if in fact deletion is the consensus.--Isotope23 17:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There's a lot to sort through here. No one's disputing WWAC-TV exists, right? From what I can tell the station is verifiable enough [7] [8]. There does appear to be false information in the article though--all credible sources I found indicate that this is an independent station, not a FOX affiliate. Should the article be deleted if the problem is with the content and not the subject itself? I'm not so sure. ScottW 18:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment To clear the air here, I am the creative services director for the station group Jersey Shore Communications, LLC. As such, I am also in charge of creating awareness for the group and its individual stations. We are currently overhauling the station group as a whole in lieu of the major network changes coming this fall season which includes rebuilding the website. Later on today we plan on putting out a press release reguarding these changes. And to reply to RGTraynor, you are reffering and incorporated business not an LLC. So I think you people need to cease this unfounded witch hunt. WWACArtist 18:31 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Nick - is this really the best way to advance your career? Bwithh 18:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'd like to say that I am friends with three individuals who work for the station. They started off as interns there. I am often subjected to listening to the music they come up with for the station, to give my opinion. They work hard and personally I think you have issues if you are going to delete them just because the web page is under construction. The web is the highway of communication but even the highway has roadwork being done on it. Also if you go to www.msn.com and search for Jersey Shore Communications, their main site which is currently under construction comes up as link 2/3 depending if you count the sub link under the first hit that comes up. Google doesn't rule the world you know. Jessica or Jes 19:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, here come reinforcements from Nick's Myspace friends. hooray. Bwithh 19:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Hello I'm Harvey Cox, News Director and Station President of WWAC-TV/DT. I'm here as requested by a few of my employees to get you to stop bothering them about the validity of our business' entry on this site. If you chose not to stop interfering, our legal department will take the nessicary actions to stop it for you. We here at Jersey Shore Communications are not going to tolerate being slandered by a colletion of twelve year olds that have no life whatsoever and whose sole purpose in life is to troll sites such as these and cause trouble. I hope you all will take this warning as serious as we are, because the consequences will be grave.

Thank you for your time.

Harvey M. Cox News Director/Executive President Jersey Shore Communications, LLC

53ND 19:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok, now you've decided to escalate the hoax by posing as other real people, and also to threaten to sue 12 year olds while in this new pose. The real Harvey Cox is News Director at NBC-40, The South Jersey New Channel (click on the Contact drop down menu) - you know a real website for a real TV station. I'm sure Nick & co have tried or will try to apply for jobs with Mr. Cox. Impersonating Mr. Cox to threaten litigation on undeletable internet forum discussions is not to way to go if you want to impress him. Bwithh 19:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - User:WWACArtist is repeatedly blanking this page. BrokenBeta [talk · contribs] 20:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Ok folks here's the deal. Me and friends of mine got caught up in a hoax and it went too far. On behalf of said individuals and myself, I appolgize for our actions and the trouble they have caused. Feel free to delete any all a references to "Jersey Shore Communications" and "WWAC-TV and DT" from this site.

20:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC)WWACArtist

• Comment The above comment by User:WWACArtist was deleted without reason by User:Nlu. No idea why. BrokenBeta [talk · contribs] 20:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Nevertheless just delete everything. 20:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)WWACArtist

• Delete per admission of hoax. Can this be speedied? ScottW 20:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per RGTraynor et al. -Big Smooth 21:01, 1 June 2006 (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.