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 delete‎. The one "weak keep" actually makes a case for deletion ("inadequate sourcing"). Sandstein 20:25, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KNLA-CD[edit]

KNLA-CD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Found some coverage in [[1]]. Let'srun (talk) 22:10, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Gonna be an odd one here. KNLA and KNET go together; they channel share and have been associated for 20+ years. There is one other article on them, "Success Story: Low-Power Target on Hispanics - World TV's Four Outlets Play to Central Americans in Los Angeles Market" (TelevisionWeek 4/28/03), but it provides little useful content other than to say KNET was religious and KNLA was home shopping. The programming on these stations now is not likely to stay: its owner is selling it to Daystar in a deal filed just last week. Daystar would probably replace all the existing programming on this mux. Six months from now, there'd be an obvious redirect target, the Daystar station list. Right now, I'm not sure. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment to Sammi Brie: So, if it does go to Daystar, KOCE-TV doesn't have to air it anymore, freeing up one of its subchannels for other programming. That could end the conflict between Daystar and KOCE... Interesting. Mer764Wiki (talk) 11:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep - inadequate sourcing, but the station’s history is fascinating and prima facie notable. Llajwa (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom, fails GNG and NCORP. Source in the article is primary and found in BEFORE found nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk  15:09, 1 February 2024 (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.