Talk:CUR1350
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
----Should this page be deleted?
Should this be deleted, or merged as per the treatment of URB 1449 (the University of Bath student radio station) - I see nothing particularly different on this page and it's content?
----This Page Needs Keeping
This page should not be deleted as the station is a key part of life at Cambridge University. CUR1350 is an independent organisation to CUSU
----This Page Needs Editing
Saying that CUR1350 is a key part of life at Cambridge University is an overstatement. The radio is not really well advertised around campus and not all students know about it.
> Survey dated Jan 2006 puts CUR1350 market awareness at 65% i.e. a majority. Thus is not an overstatement.
It is very probable that the article itself has been written by somebody belonging to the organisation. The words "cutting edge" are repeated twice in CUR1350 MySpace. In the wikipedia article, the following sentence appears: "CUR1350 has a reputation for cutting-edge strategy in media." As for the listenership, if you divide the 1450 listeners per week by 70, the number of weekly shows CUR1350 claims to have ('over 70', as highlighted in the "About Us" section of the radio website), you will get a figure of 20.7 listeners per show.
> A typical listener listens to multiple shows in one week, 20.7 per show is a vast underestimate. 1450 refers to 1450 different people. These figures do not include listeners via PA distribution to college bars.
Evidently, it is a small radio station and needs to be presented in a different way. A good start would be to cut sentences like: "CUR1350 is now a major player in the radio market of 18-30 year olds in Cambridge." or "CUR1350 has a reputation for cutting-edge strategy in media."
> CUR1350 was twice nominated for national Technical Achievement Award and won a gold for Technical Achievement in 2004. In addition, solutions developed in house have now been packaged as products and sold by the developer to small-scale radio services. Thus more evidence for inclusion than removal. Evidently (rather than by assumption), the station is presented appropriately.
...in addition case for removal was presented by a Milton Keynes resident, not a resident of Cambridge, thus independent survey of the station's value at the university is unlikely to be accurate as poster does not appear to belong to the station's key demographic.
