Talk:WNPT/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

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

Reviewer: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 04:22, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Good day, I intend to review this article. Hope to have it done by this weekend at latest. --Generalissima (talk) 04:22, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Pictures

Well, picture. It's a public domain logo, so there's not much to talk about there! I wish there were other images, but I totally understand that those are hard to find for a topic like this. All good.

Lede

Good summary of the article. A bit was confusing to me on first read and might need to be clarified: It's not immediately clear that WDCN-TV is the station that became WNPT. Maybe call it 'WNPT (formerly WDCN)' within the first couple sentences?

• Hard disagree. We don't do this in broadcasting because stations can sometimes have a lot of call sign changes. Especially radio stations.

Just from the lede, I also don't know what WSIX-TV / WNGE-TV is or why it is relevant to mention it. That might be worth clarifying or reworking so readers can get a better picture at first glance.

• Channel swap. It's confusing. There's a reason there is a link there. If I write it another way, it might be more confusing—the station became WKRN-TV in 1984. I made one minor change that I hope helps.

Educational television in Nashville: Early efforts

That section title is a mouthful, and I feel it could be shortened. Maybe just "Early efforts"?

• The long title is in part to indicate that nothing in that section is specific to WDCN/WNPT. See, for instance, KVPT.

Prose all checks out in the section; you have created a pretty engaging narrative and I can't find any sentences that seem off here.

As always, thank you for using newspapers.com clippings. This makes my job much easier checking the sources.

The channel 2 years

"Shepherd was among the youngest station managers in the country at the time." ... at what age? I feel that's important information!

• Good call. He was 32. Fixed.

Spin-off from Metro

I don't see any problems here! :3

WNPT: Nashville Public Television

Well, is it WNPT: Nashville Public Television or WNPT (Nashville Public Television)? I feel we should pick one or the other.

• One is a section header. I do this sometimes when I have call sign changes as a header divider, e.g. KDFI. I changed one more header to make this a little clearer and also better indicate why there is another L2 header.

Funding, Local programming, Subchannels, Notes, References, External links

All looks good here as well. I don't think the "(debuted 1991[96]).[93]" is actually an error but it does look pretty confusing on first parse. (Oh, hi Seigenthaler!)

General thoughts

Just a couple things need to be clarified or cleared up and we're good to go!

• @Generalissima: Responded.
  • @Generalissima: Let me try that ping again. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:51, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
    • So sorry :=( Really busy schooltime. Looking over your new changes...

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Good job :3 !

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.