Talk:WPTD

WPTD is currently a Television good article nominee. Nominated by Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) at 17:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

Short description: PBS member station in Dayton, Ohio

United States: Ohio Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.

Television: Stations Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Television stations task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Split

All the information about WPTO should be split out into its own article. Sure, both stations are very much tied to each other, but it's a full-blown television station, not a relayer, and the programming isn't always the same, either, so it's notable enough that it deserves its own article. As it stands, this article is quite confusing because it tries to cover too much. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs, blog) 04:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If not split, shouldn't this be worded more like the article for WCET, such as "WPTO's master control operations are performed in ThinkTV's Dayton facilities." 99.23.127.117 (talk) 14:40, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some changes to this article that I hope make things clearer, although no shorter. Since their merger in the 1970's, there hasn't really been a separate history for each of the stations. Back then, it was more akin to one station with two channels, now it's more like one mega-station with 8 or 10 subchannels, depending on how you look at it. It might make more sense to rename this article to "ThinkTV", but I'm new to editing Wiki, so I'm not sure if that's advisable or exactly what is involved.--Chaswmsday (talk) 08:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WCET

Would it be a stretch to refer to WCET as another satellite of WPTD alongside WPTO? All three stations share master control facilities now. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 05:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that WCET isn't really the same case. CET still exists alongside ThinkTV under the Public Media Connect umbrella. 48.1 has a lot of overlap with 16.1, since they are each the "mainstream PBS" outlet for their respective communities. WCET still largely serves Cincinnati only, while WPTD serves Dayton, and WPTO kinda-sorta serves Butler County and the Cin-Day region, Cincy, and barely Dayton. Maybe if Time Warner Cable hadn't backslid on its earlier plan to make 16 and subs available in Cincy, and 48 and subs available in Dayton, it would make more sense to turn this into a "Public Media Connect" page. 14, 16 and 48 aren't all simulcasts, like some states' statewide PBS networks, but neither are they fully independent of each other. Your thoughts?--Chaswmsday (talk) 08:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Use of non-free images on this article

This article has been identified as containing an excessive quantity of non-free content. Per the Foundation's requirement to keep non-free media use minimal, and per Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria #3, the non-free images on this article have been removed. Please note:

The presence of a fair use rationale for this article on an image description page does not make it acceptable for a given use.
Blanket restoration of the non-free images that have been removed can and most likely will be reverted, with subsequent reporting action possible.
If some restoration is desired, careful consideration of exactly what non-free media to use must be made, paying special attention to WP:NFCC #1 and #8. In most cases non-free media needs to be tied directly to the prose of the article, most preferably with inline citations tying the discussion to secondary sources regarding the image per Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If this is a list type article, please read the WP:NFLISTS guideline. If you wish to dispute this removal, it may be helpful to read WP:OVERUSE, as it answers a number of typical questions and responses to removals such as this. If after reading these, you still feel there is grounds for restoration of most or all of the media that have been removed, please post to Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 13:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Split proposal

I propose that information about WPTO be split into a separate page called WPTO. The station is notable enough on its own, and new sources can be added. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:50, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given that eventually WKTR-TV is going to occupy a lot of space in this article, I would support. If I do WPTD, WPTO could then call most of its text from this article via LST (a la WFXR/WWCW). Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:56, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mvcg66b3r If it's a station that simulcast another station, but has some history by itself and completely separate from the parent station's history, it should have its own article. I support this proposal 100% . K-Johnson 127 (talk) 19:24, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]