Talk:KUSI-TV/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 20:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
The logo has an appropriate FUR, and the other two images are appropriately licensed.
The first paragraph of "15 years of fighting" is confusing. I had a look at the source for [2], and realized that the issue was that Gross had simultaneously agreed to sell to two different parties. I think this could be clearer.- Added a clearer mention of this.
"Gross had trafficked in the permit". What is "trafficking"? It appears to be a legal term with a specialised definition here.- I've attempted to explain.
Do we know what Christian Communications' complaint was?- I think they just wanted the station.
"What had changed was an offer by the McKinnons to provide financial support": what does this mean? The McKinnons were willing to loan the money to USIU?- Yes. Clarified by noting "financial support to USIU"
- "The renamed KUSI-TV finally signed on September 13, 1982": should this be "signed on on"?
- No.
- Then I don't understand it. I assumed "sign on" meant "begin to broadcast", but that would require a separate preposition for the date. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Mike Christie: I've seen it written with just one "on" in many reliable sources in this case including Broadcasting magazine. You'd put a preposition for, e.g., "signed on in 1953" but not "signed on Monday" or "signed on January 23". Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe it's an AmEng thing, but it sounds awful to me. How about bypassing the problem by making it "On September 13, 1982, the renamed KUSI-TV finally signed on"? If you really don't like that I'll pass it for GA as it stands, since you've seen that usage in the sources. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Done for now. But yes, that is something I see even in newspapers. Ping to Mike Christie Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for sparing my BrEng ears. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:23, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Done for now. But yes, that is something I see even in newspapers. Ping to Mike Christie Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe it's an AmEng thing, but it sounds awful to me. How about bypassing the problem by making it "On September 13, 1982, the renamed KUSI-TV finally signed on"? If you really don't like that I'll pass it for GA as it stands, since you've seen that usage in the sources. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Mike Christie: I've seen it written with just one "on" in many reliable sources in this case including Broadcasting magazine. You'd put a preposition for, e.g., "signed on in 1953" but not "signed on Monday" or "signed on January 23". Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Then I don't understand it. I assumed "sign on" meant "begin to broadcast", but that would require a separate preposition for the date. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- No.
"When the sale collapsed": does this refer to McKinnon's attempt to purchase the shares from USIU, or to USIU's attempt to sell to ABRY?- ABRY. Clarified.
Are there any updates re the Maas litigation?- Found one. Trial has been continually delayed but will be December 2.
-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:59, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Pinging Mike Christie after reviewing all of the copy issues. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- All but one struck; one question left above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Now passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:23, 16 August 2022 (UTC)