User talk:JPG-GR/Archive 2

WKRK Website Schedule

Not bad on the WKRK history,as for the schedule,As I have learned,never trust the website schedule,always ask someone close to the station as I did,because its not updated, hence the famed "To Be Announced" I put on the sunday lineup after the Lions games ended.

They are scheduled to air NFL playoff games,and it has been confirmed by management that begining with the 2007 season WKRK will be co-flagship with WXYT of both the Tigers and Wings. Lugnuts6 17:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To bad that violates WP:NOR. Sure, they're showing playoff games this weekend -- that's been announced on the radio. But, show me any proof for the Tigers/Wings deal. Nothing's been officially announced that I've come across.

Radio station titles

Hi, JPG-GR. I've removed your move request for WKFR-FM from the "uncontroversial proposals" section of WP:RM, because looking at the [history of WKFR (FM) I see that it's been moved several times recently, so it doesn't quite qualify as an "uncontroversial" move. I've asked WIKISCRIPPS 07 (talk · contribs), who had moved the page twice in the opposite direction, to join the discussion at WT:RADIO, but if you want you can also file a regular move request at WP:RM#Other proposals and see what a wider audience thinks. Good luck! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response! JPG-GR 08:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radio station call signs

The statement I gave earlier referenced the clarification note in the call sign section. However, you could see from the radio station wikiproject's structure section that the note and the examples didn't exactly match. Furthermore, after looking at WP:NAME#Broadcasting, I saw that the Radio Station project needed major rewriting. Therefore, I ended up rewriting and reorganizing the entire Radio Station project page. I apologize for the misunderstanding, but the information should now be clearly presented. --PhantomS 20:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, it unfortunately appears that, at least from the articles that I've checked in the FCC database, most if not all of those stations will have to be moved back. Again, I apologize for the misunderstanding; however, your query led to an overhaul of the entire radio station project's documentation, which should prevent future mishaps of this type. --PhantomS 05:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was afraid of. I don't know when/if I'll get to moving things back -- or if I even have the desire to do so. I'll just keep working on the pages I've been working on, and go from there. Thanks again. JPG-GR 06:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I got all of those stations moved back to their official call signs now. I did have a problem with another user copy/pasting some of those pages without using the "move" tab, but I think I got all those fixed too.RobDe68 19:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. JPG-GR 20:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, JPG-GR! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BNL Singles

When you edited the BNL singles based on a nav template, you didn't take into account the purpose of the navbox. The navbox isn't there as a chronology list. Songs such as $1000000 were released as singles twice, which is why it appears in 1996 in the chronology listings of some singles, and it had two chrono listings in its own article. There would be no reason for listing it twice in the navbox because it's one article, but it was a single twice. TheHYPO 14:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that IIHAMD had been released twice (since even the article claims it was never released as a single). I did get BW, though. It was more I was sick of seeing A as a single that will, quite frankly, NEVER have an article. JPG-GR 06:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the pages to include IIHAMD where it belongs. JPG-GR 06:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A was a single. I have a copy of the single (for which they even made a clean lyric radio edit) in my closet. Unfortunately, I wasn't around back then (as a fan), so I can't speak to the actual proliferation of the song as a single. Million dollars is a major issue. I believe the story is that it was not released as a single, but radio stations got tons of requests for it based on the tape/cd/live shows, and it ended up getting a lot of airplay. I think only THEN did it get released (a radio cd) from the initial Gordon CD. There is definately a commercial disc for it from 92/3 though. It was also released in 97 commercially; but it never had a video, and I believe the band has said that it was "never released as a single", even though there are those factors involved. I think it was an unplanned single that just became one... or some explaination. As I said, it's a weird story that I don't think anyone really knows the entirety of TheHYPO 18:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thanks!

No problem; except, the vandal had committed a fourth that was missed for 20 minutes... ;) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 00:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Σφουγγοκωλάριος

It's not nonsense just because you can't read it! You could try {{db-foreign}} or request that it be translated. --Walter Görlitz 19:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was unfamiliar with the existance of {{db-foreign}}, as I had never had to use it before. On the same hand, this is the English WP, and if it's not in English, one could argue it is nosense. JPG-GR 20:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Cast devina.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cast devina.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

96.3 wdvd table

Yes, I agree that the colors may have been unnecessary. Thanks for comprising!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.84.186.6 (talk) 03:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No problem. Lot easier to compromise and move on to bigger and better things. :) JPG-GR 07:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sault Ste. Marie

I don't personally have much of an opinion as to whether Sault Ste. Marie should be included in the northern Michigan template or its own. The reality is that because of its proximity to Northern Michigan, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario actually has far fewer of its own radio stations than any of the other major cities in Northern Ontario — it even has less than Timmins, which is about half the size of Sault Ste. Marie — and so a SSM/ON-specific template would look pretty sparse and unnecessary even if I expanded it to include Wawa and Elliot Lake. I also don't think it's particularly urgent that the template format has to be consistent from city to city; while I've used the same format for all of the other Northern Ontario cities, the Southern Ontario templates don't necessarily all follow that format.

So (*shrug*) I'm really fine either way. Another option would be for SSM/ON to have its own template, which would include SSM/MI stations on it but not be transcluded onto those stations; the Michigan template, similarly, could still include the Ontario stations but not be placed on those stations' articles — and then the templates could just link to each other. Bearcat 07:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great minds think alike! :) JPG-GR 07:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To keep the potential confusion to a minimum, however, would it be possible to move the SSM/MI template to a disambiguated title like "Sault Ste. Marie, MI Radio" or "Upper Peninsula of Michigan Radio" or something to that effect? I'm think going to use "Algoma Radio" (SSM/ON's census division) as the title for the Ontario one. Bearcat 07:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Sault Ste. Marie, MI Radio" is probably the best in this case. It looks like the UP will be divided amongst this template and the Marquette template (eventually). JPG-GR 07:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BNL Reply...

My replies could be taken as personal attacks, but they're not. I just don't appreciate putting work into something - when all signs point to the new BNL album having its own page - to have it wiped without even discussing it first. It just displays a lack of civility on TheHYPO's part, not to mention an indication of WP:OWN. Conversely, you have been generous enough to add to and improve the Barenaked Ladies Are Men article, which is what I hoped would happen. So, thanks.

BGC 20:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, now that I realize the moral character of the other editor in question (see the slander he left on my talk page [1]), I'm washing my hands of it. He's convinced that he's got a monopoly on all BNL articles, and I haven't got time, nor the interest, in wasting time with immature and narrow-minded people. Besides, my points were made clear from the onset.

Thanks anyway, BGC 23:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

I appreciate your support even in part (I'm not suggesting that you necessarily agree with me on every issue around) with the BNL article matter. I invite you to support either side of the issue in the talk:Barenaked Ladies Are Me#Creating official page - Honestly, go either way you feel, but I would like your input because you tend to have a fair viewpoint on matters. Thanks :) TheHYPO 05:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

You can always talk to me in any place about any matter; I don't think I've shown otherwise. But you haven't provided any specific issue you wish to discuss. TheHYPO 00:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Of what are you speaking? JPG-GR 00:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)~~ Now, I've got it. I just put the whole BLAM/BLAMen issue up on WP:RFC. It's recommened to tag relevant editors with the template I used. I've never had a problem interacting with you personally -- just trying to get more people involved in the discussion. *shrug* JPG-GR 01:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I've never seen that template; I assumed the first part was actually you talking. Frankly; I don't care if there's an article for Are Men. It's the mispresenting it by deleting it's connection to Are Me that I take issue with. TheHYPO 18:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Phoenix741/GreenRanger

lol, no there really isn't thanks for the catch I will change it right now. Also since i am talking to someone about the boxes, and since we do have a good amount of people in the catagory. I was thinking about starting a WikiProject, how would you feel about that?Phoenix741 03:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually a WP for tokusatsu in general at WP:TOKU -- Don't know if PR needs a specific one or not. Thanks again! JPG-GR 03:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, wow never mind then, I feel like an idiot, o well thanks and glad you like my userbox.Phoenix741 03:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

commons:User:JPG-GR

I assert to be the same user as commons:User:JPG-GR JPG-GR 07:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "Market Keys"

Well, I tried to come up with the best possible solution since as you can see they are listed in alphabetical order -- hopefully so they're not too terribly confusing!!! Let's discuss this some more, shall we??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 SAT MAR 03 2007 7:12 PM EST

WKAR

Not a problem. I was actually surprised that WKAR-AM-FM didn't have their own pages, seeing as they were among the first of their kind in the country.

Say, you happen to know when WKAR-FM broke off from WKAR-AM and started running its own programming? I figure it couldn't have been before the 60s, but have found nada, zip, zero on it--you'd think wkar.org would have something on it, but it doesn't. Blueboy96 18:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't come across anything yet, but I'll keep an eye out. JPG-GR 18:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WQBR

It's hard to find info on WQBR (there are at least three dead web pages floating around) and since it's carrier-current only, it's not in the FCC database. But I assure you it's still there, broadcasting weekdays from September to April. RMc 00:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! JPG-GR 00:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects for deletion: WP:UNSIGNED

A {{rfd}} tag has been placed on WP:UNSIGNED, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. All Wikipedians can join the debate at Redirects for discussion, where articles asserted to be inappropriate to Wikipedia are discussed. You are encouraged to submit your opinion, and remember that Redirects for Discussion debates are not a vote. You can also leave a note on [[Talk:WP:UNSIGNED|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the deletion tag yourself, but don't feel inhibited from editing the article, particularly if doing so makes it clear that it is a useful contribution to an encyclopaedia. -- Robert ^See Hear _Speak 09:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Guardian of Wikipedia:

Do you get paid to do this stuff? It seems like pointless work to me. Do you have a real job? If not, I salute your valient efforts and selfless dedication to shedding much needed light on such earth-shattering topics such as the list of radio stations in Michigan! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Neversouth (talk • contribs) 17:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Detroit Radio

Hiya! i see you've made a new detroit template. Though Windsor and Detroit are one market with two nations and two audiences...i feel there should be a link to the windsor stations, or at least to the other (Detroit AM, FM, TV) templates. What's your opinion? :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 20:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I felt that the separate Detroit AM and FM templates were not only badly neglected, but also didn't work in the scope of what they were categorized under (i.e. Michigan radio). I'd be all for finding someway to include a link to a template that includes only Windsor stations, but including them directly just doesn't work. It's kinda like having a template featuring "strawberries, apples, and radishes," but then having the overall category be "fruit." I'm no expert on Windsor radio, but if you want to throw together something, I'm all for it. (Alternatively, if I find the time, I could just strip the Canadian stations out of the current Detroit AM & FM templates... or you could) Either way. JPG-GR 05:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you solved the problem already. Great! JPG-GR 05:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just testing to see if a link to Southern Ontario Radio would work...it seems like it has worked. I'm glad we could find a solution to our template dillemma. :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 14:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

meta:User:JPG-GR

I assert to be the same user as meta:User:JPG-GR JPG-GR 00:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WMLZ-LP

Somebody had posted a "deep link" to an experimental audio stream in that radio station's servers and they were alleging that it was a copyright violation. I unprotected the page but please make sure that people don't go again publishing such kinds of links. David.Monniaux 05:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help?

Hi can you help me out here? --Xallium (talk • contribs) 03:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WQBR

I think WQBR belongs in the Ann Arbor radio box. Arbitron considers all of Washtenaw County to be the "Ann Arbor market," and thus WQBR qualifies. WQBR does broadcast (albeit to only part of EMU's campus) and thus should be considered a broadcast station (as compared to U of M's WJJX, which is strictly carrier current). Thoughts? RMc 20:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As WQBR isn't officially licensed/registered with the FCC, one could argue that they're no different than some guy in a garage with the right equipment (no offence intended to WQBR). JPG-GR 23:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except that QBR's been around for 40 years and is operated by a major university. A borderline case, yes...but WQBR belongs. Make it so! ;) RMc 00:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it's been around for 40 years is a perfectly valid proof of notability (i.e. for the existance of an article on the subject) but not for inclusion in the template. It's not licensed by the FCC -- it doesn't belong in the template. JPG-GR 00:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't agree. WQBR is a broadcast station in Washtenaw County (being licensed by the FCC has nothing to do with anything, frankly) and it belongs in the template. So how do we resolve this? RMc 00:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WT:WPRS#RfC: Market Templates. JPG-GR 00:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think existing for 40 years establishes notability, unless you think an article should be created for every person over the age of 40! And being licensed by the FCC certainly is important, as it would establish at least one independent, reliable source for information about the station. DHowell 23:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date change vandalism

Thanks for catching this guy changing the dates: User/68.161.98.86. He goes through changing year pages and then he also opens up the biographical articles and makes the same changes to them. When he hits every one of his edits needs to be reverted. He always does this sort of subtle vandalism that, if it slips through, will probably not get corrected for a long, long time. He's used several different accounts and IPs, including User:Daisiesarepretty, User:68.161.130.102 and User:68.161.105.197 that I know about. If you see him again, feel free to report him to WP:AIV as soon as possible. --JayHenry 19:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Glad to help. :) JPG-GR 20:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, looks like he hit on May 9th as 68.161.110.78 JPG-GR 20:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:WDTW-FM.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WDTW-FM.jpg. 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. 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. RobDe68 05:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I more or less tagged this image because it was going to be tagged anyways and we don't really need it since there's already an image for this station and I've already gone through the trouble of marking with the proper "fair use rationale" template (I actually went ahead and did that for all the logos that I uploaded).

The other reason I tagged it is to give you the heads up about how the admins are tagging a whole slew of logos for deletion for the same thing. I think it's a new policy or something. If you're not quite sure what you need to put in the image details just click on my Fox image and copy that (change the source and station details of course). I noticed that you have a few logos out there that will eventually be marked for deletion. Nothing sinister was meant by this, honest. :)RobDe68 05:50, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, if WP wants to go through and change their fair use rules, so be it. I'm not dealing with going back and fixing all the images I've uploaded. If they all get deleted, I guess that's at the loss to the community. No problem with the WDTW image battle, though. Take care. JPG-GR 20:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did they change it then? I was kind of wondering why it was all of a sudden a problem. Reading Betacommand's comments, he made it sound like it was always the rule and we were wasting *his* time by not doing it right. Like I said, no image battle here, I just put mine back up because they made me jump through all the damn hoops to keep it "legal" (still not sure if I did it right). Cheers.RobDe68 20:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those are automated responses, as far as I know. But, yeah, they have recently changed the policy. Frankly, these are logos. They are advertising what the articles are about. Any station that doesn't want their article branded with their logo is probably in the wrong business. But, whatever *shrug* JPG-GR 20:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, per WP:FURG, Please consider, as an alternative to deletion, fixing the description page, if possible. In other words, any logo that I have uploaded has provided the website the logo was obtained from. Moreover, they're only used in the station articles that use said logo. Therefore, anybody who tags them to be deleted is probably being lazy more than following policy. JPG-GR 22:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow....

Your name has come up on my watchlist about 8 times tonight, checked your contribs and..."wow!". So...

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For the massive amount of edits you have done on the 21st of May, 2007, I hereby award you the Working Man's Barnstar. You deserve it. Congrats...NeutralHomer ^T:C 06:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) JPG-GR 16:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're Welcome :) - NeutralHomer ^T:C 16:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I made an article for KXGN-AM in Glendive, MT as [[KXGN-AM]]. It was changed a couple months later to [[KXGN (AM)]]. I originally added the -AM, because the same company owns KXGN-TV in Glendive, MT. I was wondering if the AM article should be switched by to it's original [[KXGN-AM]] or the AM taken out altogether. Thanks for your help....NeutralHomer ^T:C 19:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the AM article naming convention, written a little clearer than at WP:WPRS. (It should be noted, regardless of how the articles are named here, AM stations are always officially called by their main callsign, with no additional suffix).

If no other station utilizes the KXGN callsign, the article should be titled KXGN.
If there is an FM or TV station that utilizes the KXGN callsign, the article should be titled KXGN (AM) with a dab article created at KXGN.

At no time should KXGN-AM be anything more than a redirect, as the -?M suffix is an official title which is never assigned to AM stations.

Long story short, the article should be at KXGN (AM). Hope that helps. JPG-GR 19:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that makes sense. I am guilty, big time, of naming AM stations, that have the same calls as their FM counterpart, with the -AM, like WINC-AM. Until now, I didn't know that (AM) was the rule. So, my apologizes for my goofs.

Also, to help you out a bit, I tagged the pages I have made, and the ones on my watchlist that didn't already have it, with the {{RadioStationsProject}} template. Hope that save ya some time. Now, if I could only get a crapload of talk pages off my watchlist:) Take Care....NeutralHomer ^T:C 20:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radio station redirects

OK, I get what you're doing now. Next time, you need to use the {{db-g6}} tag and explain that you're going to be moving a page to the deleted title. Thanks, NawlinWiki 18:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! JPG-GR 18:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan Pages

The orphan pages were my fault. I thought even the redirect talk pages got tagged as well. Take a look at my contribs and you will see the ones that I tagged. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 20:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bedford Senior High School

The page that you linked to, http://www.bedford.k12.mi.us/~shs, does not explicitly support the assertion that made in the article Bedford High holds the unique distinction of being the only school in the nation that uses the mule as its mascot. And BTW, regarding your edit summary, citing your sources is not "ridiculously excessive coding" -- it is a basic fundamental expectation for editing here. older ≠ wiser 22:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And, I quote:

The pages for Bedford Senior High were created by the Advanced Web Pages classes of 2005.
Best when viewed in Internet Explorer 5.0 or later.
We have the distinction to be the only school in the nation to have Mules designated as our mascot

And, you misinterpet what I'm saying -- I'm not saying that sources don't need to be cited, I'm saying that if a source is cited for the article, there is no need to cite every specific little thing.

I'm not going to change the article back at this point, as a dinky stub article on a school is worth violating WP:3R. In the future, though, I'd recommend that you fully read a cited source before saying said source does not support the fact that it's being cited for. (x-posted to my page) JPG-GR 22:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I never thought to look at the fine print of the disclaimer for a substantive factual statement. In any case, it is a fairly weak source for such a broad statement. I'm going to qualify the assertion to reflect that the school website makes the claim (rather than a more reliable source that could be accepted without qualification). older ≠ wiser 22:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problemo, and it looks fine now. JPG-GR 22:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, it is also a demonstrably false claim. The Newmarket, New Hamphire, Jr/Sr High School is also the Home of the Mules, [2] And the Muhlenberg, Pennsylvania mascot looks remarkably like a mule, [3] although the word mule is not used. Interesting. But I'm not sure if I care enough to bother trying to qualify the statement any more. older ≠ wiser 22:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At worst, leave it how it is. At best, remove the comment altogether. Maybe it's just me, but the mule doesn't strike me as an overly intimidating mascot. *shrug* JPG-GR 22:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WUBL-FM move

This message is regarding your page move of WUBL-FM to WUBL. You are saying "The article should have no suffix because the FCC doesn't license a suffix to the station". Expanding this, the sentence is "...which, in turn, is because there is no AM station to distinguish it from". However, there might be other meanings of WUBL (with no restrictions other than that they use this simple 4-letter combination) that can be found. Doing a Google search, what will you get?? Georgia guy 22:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying there aren't any other uses for "WUBL," which is far from my belief. Naming convention states that if there are no other articles named "WUBL", this station should be located at WUBL. If other articles exist, WUBL should be a dab page, and the article should be located at WUBL (FM) (the naming convention for stations that can't be located at their callsign, but have no suffix), not at WUBL-FM. JPG-GR 22:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article to WUBL (FM). Feel free to proceed and make a dab page at WUBL now. Thanks. JPG-GR 22:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, nearly all the results of a Google search are references to this station. If a dab article isn't created at WUBL in the next few days, this set of moves may be reverted. JPG-GR 22:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fooled you

User:Destructo 087/Userboxes/Fooled2 You deserve this. And you also deserve this because you found the real one as well.User:Destructo 087/Userboxes/Hiddenpage

Reward

Congratulations on finding the hidden link!
Here is your reward, you've earned it: User:Selfworm/HiddenLinkAward Good job! _selfworm_ ^{( Talk · Contribs )_} 01:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question/Idea

As you may know, the TV Stations Project has a list of TV stations by call sign. I think it would be nice (and alot easier to search and see which stations are missing) if we had a list of radio stations by call sign. If you would like to help, I would like to take a crack at this and see a page like that go up. Let me know what you think. Take Care....NeutralHomer ^T:C 05:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I might be interested in helping, but take note of these before getting started: (1) there will be twice as many stations, as each possible callsign could be either AM and FM and (2) each market can no doubt hold MANY more radio stations than television stations. Nonetheless, I might be able to setup a basic structure for it in the next day or so. I'll let you know if/when I have something going if you wanna do the same. JPG-GR 05:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But, first, I've gotta finish cleaning up callsigns in the Kxxx range (which'll be one more sitting, I think). JPG-GR 05:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Truth be told, I kinda started something similiar two weeks ago, but then realized I had no desire to do it all alone. I got as far as WAxx (didn't pull actual frequencies when I did it, haven't wikilinked callsigns or CoL's yet): User:JPG-GR/Sandbox JPG-GR 06:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is pretty much what the TV stations page looks like, sans the networks section and a "meaning/notes" section. Yeah, that would work quite nicely. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 17:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WAxx FM stations are done. This is a big PitA, if you know what I mean. I don't know if I'll ever actually get all this stuff done. *sigh* JPG-GR 04:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I haven't been working on it....crazy stuff happened here at home this week, so that took up most of my attention, but that has died down, so back to all things Wiki. I will take a look at that page tonight and see what we can do about WBxx pages. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 04:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: here's what I've been doing: Just go to http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?call=XXX and replace XXX with WBA (which will give you all the WBAx), the WBB (all the WBBx), etc. JPG-GR 04:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WCCO disambiguation

I was curious why you re-added the disambiguation for WCCO. It only refers to one of two things: WCCO AM or WCCO-TV. Adding a disambiguation page seems pointless when there are only two items, especially since the WCCO-TV article visibly linked to the WCCO AM one. But I might be missing something... what's your rationale? Sean Hayford O'Leary 04:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, I agree with you (as long as WCCO is the AM station (official call "WCCO") and not the TV station (official call "WCCO-TV")). But, apparently it's standard procedure per WP:WPRS to dab in this case. JPG-GR 05:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arrogance and Ignorance of USA

Why would it not be correct to add USA after a location in USA? MI might mean something to you, but to those of us outside MI it can be a puzzle. In the Wiki font I first read it as ML (lower case L).

Are you creating a world encyclopedia, or just an introverted US one? (The US that sends troops to Afghanistan, but the people have no clue where that country is on a map.) Thortful 01:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that adding "USA" to any article and neglecting to wikify it as USA (or the like) is ignorance of the very purpose of Wikipedia, and is just editing for editing's sake. While I agree that the use of "MI" is stupid (and if I had caught it earlier, I would have expanded it -- as I have just done), the use of "USA" is nearly as stupid (see USA (disambiguation). Abbreviations are dangerous in most cases, I'd think.

Additionally, the decision to interject politics into a situation such as this is rather off the point, and your claim of "arrogance" is clearly against WP:AGF. Don't assume that the world is against you -- it's very hard to maintain the ability to produce helpful edits if one feels the general reading public doesn't care what they think. JPG-GR 04:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the country should be identified. I chose to refer to Afghanistan because it is much less politically controversial than another war. Your deletion of USA without replacing it with whatever you see as the polically correct name, is both ignorant and arrogant. But such is life. Thortful 05:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You not being bold and re-adding it correctly is lazy. You continually referencing goings-on in the world in relation to the editing of an article on a radio station is laughable. Your obsession with "ignorant and arrogant" and whether or not you know how to use either properly is entertaining. But, I'd prefer not to throw stones in the glass house that is Wikipedia. But, to each their own.

On the other hand, feel free to join WikiProject Radio Stations and then go through all the articles and add countries as you see fit. JPG-GR 05:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arrogance is assuming the the country name is unnecessary. Obviously it is not needed by those in the transmitting area of the station, but WP is intended for a wider audience. Ignorance is thinking that the initials USA need a reference. Like SPQR they represent the imperial power. Thortful 06:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've just proven my point -- I just had to check SPQR to have any clue what you're talking about. AGAIN, I'm not claiming that USA wasn't necessary (though, all the other geographic links in the article arguably make it redundant), I'm arguing that by adding USA and not USA you aren't doing anyone a service, except maybe your edit count. JPG-GR 19:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't realize you were such a dummy. You just go back to listening to chewing gum ads on your local radio station, while I look for intelligent company elsewhere. ex-Thortful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.48.50 (talk) 19:24, June 14, 2007

Fine with me. Make sure you teach your "company" to sign your posts. JPG-GR 00:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]