Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drew and Mike

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 Keep per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure). Clear consensus discusses the notability of the subject and the necessity for it to cite reliable sources. WilliamH (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drew and Mike

non-notable local radio show. Article fails to establish notability. Tagged for several months with numerous concerns. Resembles fansite. Rtphokie (talk) 16:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sixteen years on the air in a top ten market passes notability in my book. --InDeBiz1 (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless fully referenced and notability asserted, if (as the article claims) "Many other radio stations have played these sketches" then finding sources for this might squeeze a bit of notability into the article, but we really would need a LOT of sources for an article of this size. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 16:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Keep The article passes notability, but it needs more references and desperatley needs cleaned up. Dusti^{complain/compliment} 16:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The duo has defiantly established notability as shown here [1]. Regarding adding additional references, gentlemen please feel free to do so; I have provided a list you can pull from. To Rtphokie kudos to you guy for adding references to the article, that is appreciated. As for myself, I will even add a few. Take care all. ShoesssS ^Talk 16:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment of course, the goal is quality here not choosing sides. I'm still a bit concerned about the references in your link above. Are they all from the 'Freep? Establishing notability would be easier with some references from outside of Detroit. This isn't Detroitapedia after all.--Rtphokie (talk) 19:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment Somewhat of a strawman argument as a National or Global perspective is not a criteria for Wikipedia:notability. For example, look at all the lonely State Highway articles that keep meeting notability. Other sources would be welcome addition to the article. -- KelleyCook (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - While the subjects are strictly of regional appeal and the article could use some editing, notability is confirmed. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes notability in my opinion Plvekamp (talk) 17:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Subject is notable. Article does need to be cleaned up and sourced quite a bit though. — X96lee15 (talk) 17:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Needs cleanup and additional sources, but the two existing sources are a decent start for asserting notability. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 18:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: It was the second most popular show, ever in the Detroit market (behind J.P. McCarthy). Drew Lane's retirement made today's front page of the Detroit Free Press. One of the few recent non-syndicated radio shows to successfully fight off national shows such as Howard Stern. Though as someone has modified this page to be its current Drew-less format, it really needs to be reverted back to its historical state with some references added as the new show will not be the Drew and Mike show (and has a long way to go before it becomes notable). -- KelleyCook (talk) 18:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per InDeBiz1 & KelleyCook. Calling this radio show "non-notable" is ridiculous. JPG-GR (talk) 02:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While I whole-heartedly support the inclusion of this article, the reintroduction of unsourced material needs to stop, post haste. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 21:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:SNOW? --InDeBiz1 (talk) 00:39, 25 April 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.