Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KISS-FM (brand) (2nd nomination)

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. postdlf (talk) 19:46, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

KISS-FM (brand)

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

Last AFD relisted twice with no voting whatsoever, closed as "no consensus" with no prejudice against a speedy renom. So let's try this again. Nothing but a list of stations that call themselves "Kiss". Any sign of notability, such as the lawsuits, is completely unsourced. Article has been tagged for improvement since 2007 and nothing's happened. A search on Google Books found only directory listings and copies of the Wikipedia article. To clarify the argument a little, what little coverage I've found is about individual stations, not the brand as a whole. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 22:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 22:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 22:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. How this ubiquitous brand has developed around the country, and the various lawsuits and disputes surrounding same, strikes me as potentially a notable topic. Here is an article giving some substantial background on the national scope of the brand issue (focused on a dispute in Milwaukee but also covering disputes in Bakersfield, Chicago, and Omaha): [1] Here's one about Clear Channel's multimarket dispute with Cumulus [2]. There's sources in the article about Cleveland and more are evident at GNews. Having said that, it's worth noting that there's an existing (and extremely necessary) disambiguation page for KISS FM. It may take some discussion to work out the best way to integrate the disambiguation function and substantive information, and I have some qualms about whether AfD is the best place to have that discussion. --Arxiloxos (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The previous AfD was closed as "no consensus" just over 2 hours ago. Let's not jump into another AfD so soon. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the closer of the last AFD said "Closed with no prejudice against speedy renomination."? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:04, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (again) No, the article is not "completely unsourced", as TenPound would have you believe. I added two references verifying the Cleveland legal fight between Clear Channel and Radio One here -- both companies claimed the right to use the "Kiss" brand in Cleveland based on prior use at stations in the DC (Radio One) and Dallas (Clear Channel) markets. I would not at all be surprised if there is similar coverage from local media on the Chicago, DC, and Bakersfield cases. Levdr1lp / talk 16:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Levdr1 and last time around the ferris wheel. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Totally meaningless. Levdr1 did not say "keep", nor did anyone else in the last AFD. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There, now I've said it. Levdr1lp / talk 12:46, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Articles in Billboard and Wall Street Journal are two examples which discuss the national brand in some detail (i.e., its origins, the "McDonald's-like" consistency of its stations' logos and playlists with slight regional differences). Gong show 06:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per Gongshow and per this, this and this (though that last one might be self-published, I can't tell), there's enough here to meet WP:GNG. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:55, 13 August 2013 (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.