User talk:Mlaffs/Archives/2015/September

Deletion request

Hello. Please delete User:Avocato/common.js for me.--Avocato (talk) 02:14, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Done. Mlaffs (talk) 02:21, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. :) --Avocato (talk) 02:45, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Question/Concern

I understand (and appreciate) the piping to Capstar TX, LLC and CC Licenses, LLC pages to the main iHeartMedia page. My concern is that with those and the piping to the Cumulus Media page, that we might be overlinking the "List of radio stations by [state]" pages.

There are some that link the town/COL name, some that link the format, some that link the network (ie: K-Love, ESPN Radio, etc.), some that link the company name. Of course they all link the page. I even seen one that (for a short time) linked the frequencies. I think we might be creating a giant overlinked link farm.

So, my question, should all the "List of radio stations by [state]" pages have a uniform look? Formats linked or unlinked, companies linked or unlinked, towns/COLs linked or unlinked, etc. What do you think? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

It's a good question. I've kind of gone back and forth on it over the years, but I've been finding lately that when I've been updating licensees as a result of an acquisition, I've been linking the licensees to the owner's page more often (or at least when I remember to do so). In fact, while I was FCC-less today, I was starting to look at categorization of the larger owners, which is kind of related. The only reason I did the iHeartMedia linking today was because I checked my Watchlist last night for the first time in a while, and saw that there'd been a bunch of changes made in error to the licensees a week or so ago. I figured that while I was cleaning them up anyway, adding the link made sense, and then it was suggested to me that the redirects made more sense than the piping.

Yes, I'd say each of the state pages should absolutely be uniform, just the same as how the alphabetical lists are uniform and the frequency pages are at least uniform-ish. I'd lean toward linking all of the columns other than the frequency, although I wouldn't suggest redlinking licensees where the owner doesn't have a page. That said, that's just my opinion - it's a question that should probably be put to the project, to see what those who are still active in the project think. It'd be a big chunk of work to implement if links end up having to be added, although it's the kind of gnoming that's right up my alley, as you know. :>) Mlaffs (talk) 02:40, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I'd be the opposite and just have the calls and the COL/town linked. I think linking the format can cause overlinking problems (see List of radio stations in California). That is something for the project, though, to decide as you said. Would you like to do a quick write up on it for the WPRS talk page or would you like me to? Or is this something best saved for later? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:01, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm happy to do it, later on this week probably. Hopefully we'll get some feedback. Mlaffs (talk) 04:21, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Okie Dokie, will keep an eye out for it. Hey, while I got ya, do you think it would be too soon to create an article for a future LPFM planned to launch on December 9? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:51, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I generally go with the 'no article until the station's live' approach - well, actually, I rarely create articles, but y'know - mostly because the FCC is so squirrely these days. You could always create it in userspace so that it's ready to just slide over once they're licensed. However, if you're not going with that approach, I'd still be inclined to wait until at least a month before launch date, to minimize the chance someone will slide in and nominate it for deletion as crystal ball-ish. Mlaffs (talk) 11:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

You guessed my plan B, put it in userspace and move it when the time comes. Typically I go with the "the station launched, let's build an article" approach as well, as a rule, just because you never know what will happen.

I actually broke that rule just the other day and created four new articles for future LPFMs. One (WXRK-LP) launched last night, while the others {WQSV-LP, WPVC-LP and WVAI-LP) are all to launch within the coming days. With the FCC down, I had to take a "guess and hope it's right" approach...plus their FB pages came in handy with good information. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 11:16, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Just a Heads-Up

As of 8:04a EDT, the FCC website is still down. What a surprise. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:04, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

At 9:10a EDT, the main license pages from the AMQ, FMQ and TVQ links are working. None of the other links once you get there are working like "Station Info", "Application Info", or "Application List" just to name a few. Of course, I wouldn't expect anything to be updated with current information until late afternoon, if not tomorrow. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Looks like things won't be fully back up and running until Thursday, according to this FCC update. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:40, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm seeing that too. Good job adding the update to the two project talk pages. In the meantime, it's kind of shocking the kind of stuff I can get done just with what's available at RecNet, so I'll keep on keeping on. Mlaffs (talk) 13:50, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, they have pretty much all the information, just the coords aren't exact to what the FCC has. While you can't get application updates and the like from the FCC at the moment, the main license pages are working. So at least that's something. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

• Just tweeted out from the FCC: "Back-end upgrades are complete for CORES, CLS, Call Sign Reservation Sys, Electronic Tariff Filing System, License View, & OET Knowledge DB." Not sure what some of those mean, but hopefully it is something helpful to you. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:46, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

KHKY

Just wanted to make you aware of this discussion where I mentioned you. I pinged you a few days ago about it, but I think the PING template is on the fritz. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Check your email. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

My account is through my home email address - I'll take a gander in a few hours, after work. Mlaffs (talk) 18:21, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Okie Dokie, no worries. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:30, 18 September 2015 (UTC)