Talk:Radio Luxembourg

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Radio Luxembourg article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Radio Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Luxembourg High‑importance

	Luxembourg portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Luxembourg, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg 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.LuxembourgWikipedia:WikiProject LuxembourgTemplate:WikiProject LuxembourgLuxembourg articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Europe Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Current discussion

The current article has been extensively revised to include documented information that has replaced the previous article which contained both undocumented and incorrect information as well as misplaced trivia. Additions still need to be made to the article including expanded references. Because there are sub-articles contained within this one article, the first in a series of reference sections has been added to the "Formation" of the station section. Fragilethreads 21:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Alldis

The programme schedule quoted from 1983 includes shows hosted by Barry Alldis, yet earlier on the page, under "Presenters", it says that Barry died in 1982. These cannot both be correct! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.168.22.33 (talk) 09:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You raised an interesting point! I went to the source of the programmes and noted that Barry Alldis died in the middle of the Survey! This explains what appears to be a contradiction but is in fact a coincidence of timing. The publishers of the Survey on behalf of Radio Luxembourg (London) Ltd., were faced with a bit of trivia that had no bearing on the Survey itself and it was thus published without comment. Now that you have drawn attention to it, I went back and checked sources and added both the name of the source and the page number. In view of the fact that Barry Alldis was not broadcasting from the grave I also modified the date to reflect 1982 (the year of the Survey), rather than 1983 the year of the publication. 70.129.253.252 01:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed links to discussion page

""Your Station of the Stars", well-researched article on the Transdiffusion website"

This link and comment must have been added by someone related to the site which contains a very slanted editorial approach leading to basic errors on the site. It has no references worth speaking of and appears to be the work of the opinion of one person. If every opinion blog about Radio Luxembourg is added the links will become unreasonably long while contributing nothing to the Wikipedia article itself. An exception might be the blog by someone who worked there who can provide useful information with sources to back it up. 70.129.253.252 01:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In what way is the Transdiffusion article slanted? Do you think it contains significant errors? It does seem to contain some (admittedly unsourced) factual stuff which is quite interesting, and also it astutely sets the station in a socio-cultural context as seen by a teenager in the 1960s. (I was also a UK teenager in the 1960s and I can remember that this is exactly how it felt.) I wouldn't have thought it could all just be dismissed as an "opinion blog". I have no involvement with Transdiffusion but I believe it is quite well-regarded by radio people. Woblosch 21:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shortlived presenters

How complete do people think the lists of presenters ought to be? Is it really worth including John Drexler who was at Luxembourg for only one month in 1948, or Warren Mitchell, who (according to a Bob Stewart interview with Geoffrey Everitt in 1974) was not cut out to be a DJ and only stayed there for three weeks?

Likewise one could add Keith Skues, who did a brief stint end 1965/start 1966, or Pat Sharp, who did one month in 1982. But my impression is that Wikipedia doesn't go into such minute detail as this for other broadcasters. Imagine if one tried to list absolutely everybody who had ever been on the BBC, for instance.

My own feeling is that anybody who was there for less than, say, three months could reasonably be left out. Woblosch 10:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was more concerned that important presenters were missing. I just added Kid Jensen. I also added Paul Burnett to the 1970s/1980s list. He was the senior DJ on the station in the mid-1970s.KD Tries Again 15:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)KD[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Radiopic.jpg

Image:Radiopic.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any idiot can see that this 56-year-old picture of the cover of a long-defunct magazine is not in any meaningful sense copyright. Why on earth are you being so anal about this? Woblosch 22:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Radiopic.jpg

Image:Radiopic.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:208-2.jpg

Image:208-2.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook group - Radio Luxembourg - The great 208

Hi there,

Some time back, I started an open facebook group for anyone wishing to communicate anything about 208. There are quite a few of the former DJs who have joined, and former staff members, such as myself (former station manager in Luxembourg from 1977 to 1991)

I tried adding the link for the facebook group to the list of links - but it got "bounced"

Can anyone else figure out how to put it in? Its beyond my skills :(

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7670075753&ref=mf

I think anyone interested in Radio Luxembourg will find this a great link - there are some great contacts in the group - and there are many wonderful photographs, some never seen by the public.

Best wishes,

Mike Knight June 4th 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.246.106.4 (talk) 12:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Christian and Bob Stewart

The links for these 208 deejays are misleading, linking to articles on other people with the same name. 90.7.8.1 (talk) 22:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Garner Ted Armstrong

If Horace Batchelor gets a mention, shouldn't the same courtesy be extended to the American evangelist Garner Ted Armstrong, another indelible (though seldom actually listened to) memory from the classic days of Radio Luxembourg? Rodparkes (talk) 12:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 April 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Number 5 7 12:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Luxembourg (English) → Radio Luxembourg – This article looks to be the primary topic. Of the other candidates in the current disambiguation page, only one other is actually called "Radio Luxembourg", which has a tenth of the average views when compared to this article. [1][2] The existing page Radio Luxembourg should move to Radio Luxembourg (disambiguation). Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:54, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. "(English)" is not a properly constructed disambiguator anyway. They call themselves just plain "Radio Luxembourg."[3] The initializer (talk) 22:33, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Transmission power

The article states the (eventual) transmission power for the Medium wave transmitter used by the English language service as 1,300 kw which coincides with on-air announcements at the time which stated 1,300,000 watts omnidirectional. However there is plenty of documentation (World radio TV handbooks for one) indicating that the actual power was 1,200 Kw and that the aerial system was (slightly) directional (and steerable towards either the UK or Germany). Can anyone explain the disparity ? 2A00:23C7:70C:EF00:4830:E4FA:72F4:D07F (talk) 18:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]