Talk:Captain Midnight broadcast signal intrusion/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Surachit (talk · contribs) 04:54, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   My only concern here is Reference #7 (Signal to Noise). It looks to be a personal website, which isn't considered a reliable source per WP:SELFPUBLISH. The reference is heavily used, as well (13 citations).*

• @Surachit: To my knowledge, the text in the article is reprinted from a reliable source of which it has not been identified which one it originates from. Ref 13 also has a link to it and states what I have stated. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

4. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

5. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lead

• MacDougall surrendered to the authorities and was served with a court subpoena after a tourist overheard him talking about the incident while on a pay phone off Interstate 75. This is chronologically accurate, but it makes it sound like the tip was the main thing that lead to him being captured. From the rest of the article, it sounds like the most important part of the investigation was tracking down capable transmitters and stations equipped with a specific character generator.
  • Rewritten that section of the lead to make that clear. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• I think the lead should include the area affected by the jamming (eastern half of the US, per the Jamming section) and/or the number of potential viewers (not currently in the article)
  • Added. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• Under an agreement with his attorney, he plea bargained Isn't a plea bargain an agreement with the prosecutor? I suppose "attorney" here is referring to the U.S. attorney that was prosecuting him, but phrasing it as "his attorney" makes it sound like a reference to his defense attorney.
  • Clarified. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• making satellite hacking a felony. The Aftermath section uses the term "satellite hijacking" instead of "satellite hacking," are they synonymous?
  • Corrected. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Background

• When the industry began charging viewers for access to its services via cable... Would it be possible to add when this happened? From the context it was sometime between the 1920s and the 1970s, which is a pretty big timespan.

• "Satellite dishes" could be wikilinked.
  •  Done MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• "Cable television" is wikilinked in the second paragraph, but it was mentioned in the first paragraph. I think it would be better to link the first instance of the term (in the section) instead.
  •  Done MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• Satellite dish owners began protests over scrambling, saying that clear signals from cable channels would become difficult to receive. I find this sentence a little confusing. Isn't the idea of scrambling to make it impossible to receive (meaningful) signals, not merely difficult? I know that scrambling can be broken, but the way "clear signals" is specifically mentioned here, it makes it sound like the problem dish owners faced was that they would receive unclear (i.e. subpar, or fuzzy) signals.
  It's also kind of stating the obvious. The whole idea of scrambling is to make paid channels difficult to receive. I think this sentence should be re-worded. Maybe something along the lines of "dish owners began protests over the high fees charged by [HBO/cable companies]," or over "free access to broadcasts."
  •  Done MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• one week before the jamming, MacDougall transmitted a color bar test pattern "test pattern" could be wikilinked to test card.
  •  Done MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Jamming

• As I mentioned earlier, I think the number of HBO subscribers in the area affected (i.e., the potential number of viewers) deserves a mention. Reference #3 states:

  It was seen in the Eastern two-thirds of the nation, which accounts for more than half of HBO's 14.6 million subscribing households

  • Added MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Arrest and prosecution

• After media and industry pressure forced the FCC to act, MacDougall was charged after surrendering to the authorities. The wording makes it sound like the FCC only acted because of media/industry pressure. The pressure is significant and worth mentioning, but I think the FCC would have acted anyway. As reference #11 puts it:

  One of the principal responsibilities of the FCC is to insure that no one interferes with the licensed users of the nation's airwaves

  Reference #6 mentions:

  Even before the break-in the Federal Communications Commission had warned it would deal harshly with anyone attempting to interfere with TV programming.

  • Added those sections of text into the article. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• He was interviewed by the major news stations in the western hemisphere Seems like a weird turn of phrase. Was he interviewed by the major Central and South American news stations? And not interviewed by European ones?
  • Clarified to say it was the United States as I cannot find any evidence for other countries. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Aftermath

• MacDougall had not been able to achieve folk-hero status "Folk hero" is hyphenated here, but it wasn't in the previous section. Should be consistent, either way.
  •  Done MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• As of 2017, he still resides in Ocala and undertakes consulting work. The source for this is from 2011.
  •  Done MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• The Mental Floss article mentions his electronics business is still in operation, which is worth mentioning. There's even a link to the site in this article's External links section.
  • Added. MWright96 (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Nice work overall, I thought this article was a very interesting read. Placing it on hold for now to let you respond to my comments/suggestions, and to clear up the issues with reference #7 (if I am wrong, let me know, but it seems to not be a reliable source). –Surachit (talk) 04:54, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@MWright96: Wow, that was fast. I'm passing it now. –Surachit (talk) 20:16, 10 February 2018 (UTC)