This category is within the scope of WikiProject Radio Stations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of radio stations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Radio StationsWikipedia:WikiProject Radio StationsTemplate:WikiProject Radio StationsRadio station articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punk music, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Punk musicWikipedia:WikiProject Punk musicTemplate:WikiProject Punk musicPunk music articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This page should not be speedily deleted because it's a valid category, the CFD happened too long ago to be enforced via G4 and the recent DRV didn't result in expliciti consensus against recreation. --ArmbrustTheHomunculus 09:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The DRV closed today endorsed the CfD result, the age of which does not matter. It also concluded explicitly that there was no consensus for creating the category again (actually neither for or against). This absence of consensus about recreation is therefore trumped by the last re-endorsed consensus, which was for deletion. Creating the category against despite this still ongoing deletion review was only done to add fuel to another ongoing CfD discussion about an individual radio station. As is cited in this discussion, nominations at CfD have shown a longstanding consensus against individual radio station categories. This is not a "valid category". Place Clichy (talk) 11:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, the DRV closure said "There is no consensus about whether to recreate it", and that's completely different than what you say above. ArmbrustTheHomunculus 11:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Speedy deletion is explitly only for uncontroversial cases. The most recent discussion about the category resulted in no consensus regarding whether it should or should not be recreated, so deletion is not uncontroversial and it therefore not eligible for speedy deletion. I will remove the tag, but note this is without prejudice to CfD but I strongly encourage a discussion to establish what the current consensus actually is (per the DRV) first. Thryduulf (talk) 11:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"First" before what? Seen the DRV, I would think that it is strongly advisable to establish what the current consensus actually is before re-creating the category, not before nominating it to CfD, which is a venue for discussion. Place Clichy (talk) 13:36, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the discussion should have happened first, but it didn't. So the second best thing to do is to have the discussion now. It's clear from the DRV, this discussion and the KCRW CfD that any consensus there was (and it is not universally agreed that there was) about radio station categories might have changed so holding of on both deletions anddeletions nominations is the least disruptive thing to do. Even aside from that, if there are good faith objections that a speedy deletion criterion applies then it does not apply, and this applies regardless of what general consensus exists regarding that type of page. Thryduulf (talk) 14:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry for misreading the comments, which I thought allowed the recreation. That said, I think this category has enough merit to exist. --evrik(talk) 03:50, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
