Jump to content

Talk:KMYS

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:KRRT-TV)

First move attempt

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Not moved WhiteNight T | @ | C 04:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]

The reasons for move copied from the entry on the WP:RM page

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • Oppose. Move to KRRT (TV) to be consistent with Radiojon's rules about how radio and TV station articles are to be titled based on their callsigns. Other meanings of KRRT (not restricted to callsigns) might be revealed by a Google search (not necessarily at this moment; even if nearly all results are for the TV station, this might change soon.) 66.32.148.106 20:37, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. KRRT is the ICAO airport code for Warroad International Airport-Swede Carlston Field. KRRT should be a DAB article with unique names for each use of those 4 letters. Vegaswikian 22:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
Add any additional comments

Source for KRRT lacking a -TV suffix: KRRT in the FCC TV station database --/ɛvɪs/ /tɑːk/ /kɑntɹɪbjuʃ(ə)nz/ 02:26, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I wish I would have seen this as both WP:NC#Broadcasting and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television_Stations#Article_names are in consensus on this topic. The article name should be the call sign of the station. If there needs to be a disambig page, such as when more than one station uses the call sign the page should be named in this case KRRT (TV). I will renominate this move as it should be a no-brainer. —A 06:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move to KRRT (TV). —Nightstallion (?) 13:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (2)

[edit]

Voting (2)

[edit]
  • Support, KRRT Per nomination and comments. —A 06:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Oppose. The disambiguation page exists. It causes no harm. Just move the article to KRRT (TV) which you can do right now since it is not a controversial move and your comments say is the form to be used for just this case and it is one of your options. The template that was causing the links to the DAB article has been fixed so that it now links to the article. Vegaswikian 09:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion (2)

[edit]
Consensus on both WP:NC#Broadcasting and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television_Stations#Article_names is that US TV station articles should be named either "callsign" or if there is need for a disambig "callsign (TV)". Only stations that are assigned by the fcc a callsign that ends in -TV should have an article named as such. This is not the case as can be seen here. As to the topic of not needing a disambig page at KRRT, I have added the airport to the top of the page as a disambig link as has been done a few times before. The other use is an accronymn for a page that doesn't exist for a river parkway that doesn't yet exist. I strongly encourage others to vote for this page to be moved to KRRT to maintain consistency across TV station pages. —A 06:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for moving this and effectively ending the discussion. Obviously if I had known about this I would not have done so. If you need me to fix the situation, I am at your beck and call. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 17:40, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am partialy to blame for this. I regularly place callsigns on a certain portion of the talk page for WP:TVS that need moving. While I did place this article on that list with an extra link to this talk page, in an attempt to get others involved with the project involved in this discussion, I guess it was not enough to alert user:Reflex Reaction to the situation. I will make it more clear in the future if pages are up for contested move, and I will fully support moving this page back if the vote ends up with that oppinion. —A 07:28, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If there are no objections I'll move the article to KRRT (TV) since that was one of the suggested options and avoids a future dab move. If you are working on the TV project, maybe they need to do what some other projects do. That is suggest that the name for a 4 character article be setup as a redirect or a dab at the start to avoid problems down the road. Vegaswikian 06:53, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merge?

[edit]

I have proposed that the KRRT TV Tower article should be merged with this one. They are both stubs and the tower article really has no information on it that would make it enough for an article of its own. Unless someone can expand either (or both) of these articles I think they should be merged.Tartan 16:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- AlexDW 22:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

4 KIDS TV

[edit]

I Looked At Thier Website, and 4 KIDS TV Airs On KMYS.

Fair use rationale for Image:Sanantonioswb.jpg

[edit]

Image:Sanantonioswb.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on KMYS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:30, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:10, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:KMYS/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 00:23, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a. (major aspects):
    b. (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
    b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Minor adjustments

  • I made a few very minor script-suggested changes. Feel free to revert any that are objectionable.

Copyvio check

  • No concerns from the matches found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. I reviewed both of the matches above 1%.

Sources

  • Source name is missing from Monroe, Mike (September 6, 2006). "Barnett will return to Spurs' booth". p. 7C.
  • A couple of Jakle links are missing page numbers, i.e. January 5, 1995; and January 7, 1995. Is there a reason for this?
  • Sinclair filed to purchase KRRT outright in November 1999, upon the legalization of duopolies - I don't think that the page cited explicitly confirm "upon the legalization of duopolies". Maybe add an additional cittion for the previous page of the same source?
  • The enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov link looks OK, but as it's a direct link to a PDF, do you know here I can check that "Licensing and Management System" is the right website in the citation? (It looks fine, but I feel I should just confirm.)
  • I think all the sources have archives except Flaum, David (August 17, 1985). Not required for GA, but optionally you could archive this one as well.
  • Again, not required for GA, but sources are inconsistently linked, e.g. San Antonio Express-News is sometimes linked, sometimes not.
    • @BennyOnTheLoose: Most of your source concerns are explained together: I can't link to NewsBank sources with the proxy I have. And sometimes I miss a field here or there in typing the sources out. Sometimes, NewsBank does not include page numbers for articles particularly of older editions of newspapers; a few papers are just truly borked with metadata in NewsBank (The Hawk Eye in Burlington, Iowa, comes to mind, with titles like "TV Comm", "By Mike9", etc.). The Express-News articles that are linked exist outside of NewsBank. I also fixed the duopoly legalization issue. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:59, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

History

  • Spot check on The commission made the assignment effective January 1982 - no issues.
  • Spot check on KRRT (for his initials) - no issues.
  • Spot check on unable to lure investors to its junk bonds even before Black Monday. - no issues.
  • Spot check on Multiple outlets reported in November 1993 that River City Broadcasting was close to buying KRRT - I usually take "Sources say" to be unnamed people with an interest, rather than "outlets". Are you confident that the source supports the statement?
    • Redid this area a bit.
  • The phrase "signed on the air" in "The station first signed on the air on November 6, 1985" seemed slightly odd to me (based in the UK), but if it's an ENGVAR or technically correct phrase then no need to change it.
  • Similarly for "station brass" - I understand it, but it seems odd.
    • These two tweaked. #2 is fine but also too floral and I get that at GAN enough. I went with "began broadcasting" for #2 even though #1 would be perfectly acceptable.
  • 1998 also brought... - my reading of MOS:NUMERAL is that a sentence shouldn't start with a year.
    • Done
  • independent stations, joint sales and shared services could, optionally, be wikilinked, as they are in the lead, without violating MOS:REPEATLINK.
    • Done (I get asked to do this at enough GANs)
  • KENS, in "KENS II" and KENS-TV both link to the same article, but I'm open to a liberal interpreation of "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but it may be repeated if helpful for readers" in MOS:REPEATLINK.
  • I don't think that the duplicated link for UPN in the body is necessary.
    • Thanks. Some of that language tends to be used across a number of articles, so I'm not too surprised.

Technical information

  • The info here all seems to be supported by sources, but the citations are only against the Subchannels provided by KMYS-TV (ATSC 1.0) table. Citations could be added to the Subchannels of KMYS (ATSC 3.0) table.
    • Added one more for that table.

Infobox and lead

  • No link for the website in the infobox? (I'm assuming it's https://cw35.com/)
    • Nope. As a result of what Sinclair did in 2021, that technically belongs in the WOAI-TV infobox. These articles have an extra layer of confusing, and honestly a hatnote is merited on all of them. "CBS 14" is not KMEG, "My 40" is not WMYA-TV, and "Fox 28" is not KFXA. In 2021, after a lot of Sinclair's coordinated partners were hit with $500,000+ fines per station for bad-faith negotiations in retransmission consent, Sinclair started taking the guts of these stations—programs it owned—and putting them on subchannels of stations it owned, leaving stations like this one with no local programming whatsoever.
  • The technical information is unsourced, but I see that this is generally true with articles of this type so I'm happy to go with consensus that sources are not required for these uncontroversial facts.
    • You can also verify this by clicking on the link labeled "LMS" in the infobox.

Thanks for your work on the article, Sammi Brie. The article's coverage seems appropriate and balanced, from what I've seen in sources. The points above about prose above may be due to my lack of knowledge about terminology or American English rather than actual issues. Thanks for responding so promptly on the sourcing comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 01:58, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that a San Antonio TV station lost its Fox affiliation on 12 days' notice to the public? Source: Jakle, Jeanne (January 5, 1995). "Fox flips to KABB-TV Jan. 16". San Antonio Express-News. "Starting Jan. 16, San Antonians will be turning to a new channel for such hit series as "Melrose Place," "The X-Files" and "The Simpsons," as well as Dallas Cowboys games and other NFL contests. Fox Broadcasting Co. announced Wednesday that it will switch its affiliation in the San Antonio market that day from KRRT-TV, Channel 35 and Paragon cable channel 7, to independent station KABB, Channel 29 and cable 11."

Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie (talk). Self-nominated at 18:42, 22 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/KMYS; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Approve ALT0. Made a GA on the same day as nom, everything looks fine, AGF the offline refs, enough said. ミラP@Miraclepine 23:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:KMYS&oldid=1200301907"