Talk:WGBO-DT

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:WGBO-DT/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 22:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Images are appropriately tagged.

• Per WP:RS/PS, PR Newswire is not a reliable source.

• Replaced with better sources.

• "It was owned by the Grant Broadcasting System from 1986 to 1988, during which time it was the least successful station in its portfolio": two conflicting uses of "it"; I think this should be "It was owned by the Grant Broadcasting System from 1986 to 1988, during which time it was the least successful station in Grant's portfolio".

• Fixed.

• "The four bids merged in a settlement agreement": we only specify the role of Murchison and Focus; do we know anything about Lago Grande and AT&CC's interest?

• They were reimbursed and bowed out. Addressed with a new reerence.

• "its subscription offering, Spectrum, bowed on the 29th": I would guess "bowed" means it began broadcasting; if so I think we should use another word; I doubt this would be understood by readers with no background in the topic.

• Tweaked.

• "United launched the third and final HEN STV station": what does "HEN" mean? Probably "Home Entertainment Network" since we've just mentioned that, but if so I would add "(HEN)" after the first mention.

• Tweaked to avoid gratuitous mention.

• Suggest linking "wrote down" to Write-off#Write-down.

• Done

• "United Cable sold the Chicago business to ON TV parent Oak Communications, and Spectrum subscribers began viewing ON TV programming on March 1, 1984": does this mean that both WSNS and WFBN viewers saw ON programming at this point? If so I think that should be clearer.

• Yes, it does, but of course you had to be subscribed. Tried to make this clearer.

• Not relevant for this GA nomination, but I'm curious: what's the purpose of the invisible comments saying e.g. "Mon" and "Fri"?

• They are generated by PressPass, the utility I use to preformat newspaper citations from Newspapers.com. The main point is to provide the day of the week which can sometimes be useful in parsing newspaper articles.

• There seems to be a syntax problem with the long sentence starting "With many program distributors..."; after the semicolon, the structure seems to be "after Metrowest filed a petion, claiming <something>", which is not a complete sentence. Is this meant to say that Focus and Grant's warning, earlier in the sentence, came after this filing by Metrowest? If so a semicolon is wrong, but I'd rewrite anyway as it's too long to parse easily.

• Woof, somehow that sentence got unwieldy. Four months later, I can say it stinks, and I rewrote it.

• "After Time Warner announced the launch of The WB on November 2, 1993, the network had entered into discussions with WGBO to become the network's Chicago affiliate;": suggest cutting "had" unless there's a nuance here I'm not seeing. And I think the semicolon there is wrong -- they're used to join related ideas that have no direct syntactic relationship, but it looks like "even though..." is meant to relate to the first part of the sentence.

• Woof, another bad area. This one was one I had kind of left untouched (and it had both of those PR Newswire items).

• " Its schedule was partially cleared by a longtime independent and ethnic station, WCIU-TV (channel 26)." What does "cleared" mean here?

• Cleared = aired. Very common in the trade. News outlets will say a syndicated show is "cleared" in 70% or 80% of the country or that a station "clears" network programming. This is something I'd like to keep as is.

• "while the Mass moved to WEHS-TV": suggest "while the Catholic Mass moved to WEHS-TV" -- by this time I'd forgotten the earlier mention of broadcasting the Mass.

• Done.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: Responded to everything. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:44, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Everything looks good except that I think if you want to keep "cleared" (and I understand why) I think we have to have a link to an entry in glossary of broadcasting terms, or a footnote, or an inline explanation. It never occurred to me that that might be the meaning. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: Added a definition into the glossary. The earliest uses of this term go to the 1930s and were generally in the context of "time clearance" (clearing time on a station to make way for some network or syndicated program). Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Looks good; passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

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 Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:42, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a Chicago TV station lost more than $13 million in a year, helping push its parent company into bankruptcy? Source: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/98514467/grant-says-losses-top-forecasts-1986/
  • ALT1: ... that Univision bought a Chicago TV station that wasn't for sale? Source: Kidd Stewart, Janet (January 8, 1994). "Univision to Buy Channel 66". Chicago Sun-Times. p. 32. Available upon request.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Turkish Airlines fleet

Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie (talk). Self-nominated at 18:50, 18 August 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Hmm, I do not think I could pass this up. An article recently promoted to GA and is long enough as it's greater than the 1,500 characters in the prose. Everything is properly sourced, neutral in tone, and free from copyright or close paraphrasing. Earwig only picks up quotes or common words or phrases. Both hooks are very interesting. Although, I like ALT 1 a bit more for its hooky-ness. Both hooks are cited. In any event, this article was a pleasant read for the morning. QPQ is completed.

If there is any feedback I could give, I would change citation [49; The New York Times] title's capitalization per Help:Citation Style 1#Titles and chapters and citations [64; RabbitEars] and [65; RabbitEars] website parameters from "www.rabbitears.info" to "RabbitEars". All around well done! Adog (Talk・Cont) 14:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

• The RabbitEars fix I was pointed to at FAC for WBPX-TV, and new refs of that type have that fixed. NYT metadata...can be a bit hard with capitalization. Thanks so much. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:32, 19 August 2022 (UTC)