Jump to content

Talk:WWJ-TV/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:WWJ62.PNG

Image:WWJ62.PNG is being used on this article. 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 this Wikipedia article 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. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. 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.

BetacommandBot 05:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I removed a reference to adding the call sign, channel numbers and city of license under the logo "CBS Detroit" in station promotion. This is not a change in the station brand, simply the addition of information required to legally identify the station at the top of the hour.Thomprod 19:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The Ghoul in Detroit TV

The Ghoul aired in Detroit originally on Kaiser Broadcasting's WKBD (channel 50), being produced by its sister station WKBF also owned by Kaiser in Cleveland, Ohio, from 1971 through 1975. When Kaiser dropped the program, the Ghoul moved to Detroit where his show was produced by and aired over WXON (channel 20). The show moved briefly to WGPR (channel 62) and then back to WXON.Thomprod 19:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

only major affiliate without a news department

It is also the largest major-network affiliate (ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC) without a news department. Although WWJ-TV does not produce local news of its own, it still airs national news programming from CBS News...

Um, wait a minute... if the station is owned by the network, it isn't an affiliate. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 00:59, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality of statements in History/Purchase by CBS section

I question the neutrality of the recently added statements:

  • "Making matters worse, WWJ-TV has had to compete with longtime VHF CBS affiliates WTOL channel 11 in Toledo, Ohio and WLNS channel 6 in Lansing, Michigan. Both stations signals cover the Detroit/Windsor area decently."

I have placed a notice on the editor's talk page here. Thomprod (talk) 16:33, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Removal of disambiguation

Two links were removed that may have helped readers looking for previous uses of the WWJ callsign here. Unless there is some project guideline that requires it, I think they should be restored. Although there is a link to the disambig page in the edit summary, the casual reader would not know how to find it. --Thomprod (talk) 11:37, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Someone made a separate page if just WWJ is searched for. TomCat4680 (talk) 15:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I put the hatnote for WWJ (AM) back in, since its a current station it belongs there. TomCat4680 (talk) 15:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
The WWJ (disambiguation) page seems unnecessary since half of the list is redlinks. WWJ should go to WWJ (AM) by default with a hatnote to WWJ-TV (and of course vice versa). TomCat4680 (talk) 15:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

File:62cbsdetroitlogo.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:62cbsdetroitlogo.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 8 March 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:62cbsdetroitlogo.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:43, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Adding unreferenced entries of former employees to lists containing BLP material

Hello, Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to the list of former employees in the article. Not including this type of material in articles abides by current consensus and its inclusion is strongly discouraged in our policies and guidelines. The rationales are as follows:

  1. WP:NOT tells us, Wikipedia is "not an indiscriminate collection of information." As that section describes, just because something is true, doesn't necessarily mean the info belongs in Wikipedia.
  2. As per WP:V, we cannot include information in Wikipedia that is not verifiable and sourced.
  3. WP:NLIST tells us that lists included within articles (including people's names) are subject to the same need for references as any other information in the article.
  4. Per WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.

If you look at articles about companies in general, you will not find mention of previous employees, except in those cases where the employee was particularly notable. Even then, the information is not presented just as a list of names, but is incorporated into the text itself (for example, when a company's article talks about the policies a previous CEO had, or when they mention the discovery/invention of a former engineer/researcher). If an article already exists in Wikipedia for the person you're considering adding to the list, it is generally considered sufficient to demonstrate their inclusion in a list of past employees is appropriate. 70.48.216.22 (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Can someone replace the blue logo in the info box with the new silver and gold logo the station adopted in September? --108.234.242.106 (talk) 03:41, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

 Not done This is the full logo. They still use it... Since they use a shortened logo, it isn't shown on everything, but it is still the logo. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 04:39, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on WWJ-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on WWJ-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:40, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on WWJ-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

"The Ghoul" did not air on WGPR

"The Ghoul" aired in Detroit first on WKBD and later on WXON, but not on WGPR. Unless someone can cite a source for this assertion, I will remove it from the article.--Thomprod (talk) 19:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@Thomprod, see Kiska 2005 as well as Castelnaro 2006 p221: In 1979, the Ghoul checked into the Jefferson Avenue studios of WGPR, Channel 62, where he aired in prime time on Friday nights. When a change in management occurred at WXON in the beginning of the new decade, Ron Sweed was welcomed back to Channel 20, where he stayed until Ghoul Power declined in the mid-1980s. (As an aside, the article was just rewritten.) Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:18, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:WWJ-TV/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Rlink2 (talk · contribs) 01:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Incidentially, I have heard about Bill Bonds, who worked for one of the other stations in the Detroit area. Controversial figure. Anyways .... Creating this page, will fill with comments shortly.

@Sammi Brie Will fill out right now. I am extremely sorry for the delay, I should have gotten to this earlier. Rlink2 (talk) 23:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
@Rlink2: Since this is a joint nom between @Sammi Brie and myself, I'll be commenting with text formatted like this as a distinguisher. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 02:26, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
@Sammi Brie: Again, extremely sorry for the delay. For the replacements: if I don't provide the exact location use your browsers find feature

Is it well written?

  • Under common ownership with CW station WKBD-TV (channel 50), both stations share studios on Eleven Mile Road in the Detroit suburb of Southfield, while WWJ-TV's transmitter is located in Oak Park. Maybe this should be reworded a bit.
    A suggestion would be something like WWJ-TV shares a studio with CW station WKBD-TV on Eleven Mile Road. I'm not sure that the Oak Road part is revelant, seeing how its not discussed much in the article. I'm not against including it, but it may make it harder to create a good sounding setnence with both pieces of info.
  • We've been dealing with a lot of issues about leads in TVS (after suggestions came up at GAN a couple of weeks ago). It's important to note they are commonly owned. Oak Park is mentioned later in the article and there is actually a photo of the site.
  • Yes, WKBD-TV and WWJ-TV have been commonly owned with shared studios for nearly 25 years. Maybe having (channel 50) is unnecessary, I'll take it off for now and see if that works better. ... under the CBS News and Stations group was added separately.
  • In the 2nd part of the lead I think using the TV station name is better than channel 62 in Detroit.
  • It's hard to do the way that sentence is structured at this time.
  • I'm probably going to have to think about it, but I agree with Sammi, a revision is going to be not that easy to do.
Ok, that is fine. It's not a big deal in the grand scope of things.
  • There should probably be a colon in between WGPR and It in the first paragraph of the 2nd section under "Built by Masons", to make it seem flowing. The sentence What made this action noteworthy was the nature of WGPR. all by itself doesn't necessarily flow.
  • Agreed and fixed.
  • A game show, Countdown, was to be hosted by Conrad Patrick, one of the 15 White employees on a staff of 48. The wording implies that they never went through with this. If so, it could be helpful putting the reason. If you cant put it in there, then maybe say "Conrad Patrick, one of the 15 white employees on a staff of 47, had planned to host a game show......"
  • It's unclear why. I see one mention of it being delayed and then it just drops off the radar.
  • Rephrasing makes sense, and done.
  • Is it necessary to blue link née in Amyre née Makupson?
  • {{nee}} does this, so I am imagining it is considered a standard.
  • I was trying to go by MOS:NEE as Amyre was identified and promoted by her maiden name when the station launched. I did switch the order around to be Amyre Markupson (née Porter) ...
I didn't know about MOS:NEE. That makes sense.
  • WGPR-TV's license renewal was briefly delayed in 1993, but for wholly unrelated reasons: it was one of seven television stations the FCC cited for failing to meet educational and informational standards in children's programming. When the reader see's the reason, it will become clear that its "wholly unrelated" so wouldn't it be better to just say WGPR-TV's license renewal was briefly delayed in 1993 because it was one of seven television stations the FCC cited for failing to meet educational and informational standards in children's programming. ?
  • Done.
  • those networks negotiated renewals with their stations should be both networks negotiated renewals with their stations so we know we are talking about ABC/NBC and not ABC/NBC/CBS. Also in the case of the latter, additional affiliations between ABC and Scripps-owned stations in other cities. can reworded to clearly specifiy WXYZ
  • Agree on both of those. The "other cities" remark is about stations in Phoenix, Tampa, and Baltimore. See KNXV-TV for a bit more explanation on this.
  • I've reworked it like this: First, the network attempted to woo the NBC and ABC affiliates, WDIV-TV and WXYZ-TV, away from their existing alliances. It failed to do so; both NBC and ABC negotiated renewals with their stations that increased network compensation payments as much as four- to fivefold.[100] In the case of ABC's renewal with WXYZ-TV, additional contracts were secured with stations owned by WXYZ's parent company Scripps-Howard in several other cities.
  • If the term "LMA" is only used twice, then remove the abbreviation paranthesess and spell it out the 2nd time you use it the commission recognized that the terms of the local marketing agreement showed George Mathews still holding control over channel 62's programming,
  • Done.
  • Another objection was filed that had little to do with the Detroit station by a Ukrainian-American man from Troy, Michigan, who claimed that a report on 60 Minutes was distorted and inaccurate. this could be phrased better. Maybe A Ukrainian-American man from Troy filed a complaint regarding an report on 60 Minutes that he thought was inaccurate, even though 60 minutes was not produced by WGPR-TV.
  • Done. I added ... even though 60 Minutes was produced by CBS News and not WGPR-TV.
  • Surviving episodes of The Scene, totaling 300, were rebroadcast starting in January 1995 could be rephrased to The 300 surviving episodes of The Scene were rebroadcast starting in January 1995
  • Done. I phrased it as 300 surviving episodes of The Scene instead of The 300 surviving episodes of The Scene as it didn't feel grammatically correct.
  • While CBS faced many challenges in its effort to make WWJ-TV competitive—David Poltrack, the executive vice president for planning and research for the CBS stations, called Detroit "the toughest situation for us" in the country, and CBS ratings fell 46 percent year-over-year[148]—the physical plant was among the largest needed improvements. should be CBS faced many challenges in its effort to make WWJ-TV competitive—David Poltrack, the executive vice president for planning and research for the CBS stations, called Detroit "the toughest situation for us" in the country, and CBS ratings fell 46 percent year-over-year[148]. The physical plant was among the largest needed improvements, and channel 62 had an inadequate signal now that it was a market-wide network affiliate.
  • Done. Instead of ...in its effort to make WWJ-TV competitive—David Poltrack... I opted for ...in its effort to make WWJ-TV competitive: David Poltrack..
  • In the lead:

However, the station has made only brief and partial attempts at producing local newscasts in its more than 25 years under CBS ownership, at times holding a dubious distinction as the only station directly owned by either of the "Big Three" networks not to have any news presence.. It's my impression from the article WWJ still doesn't have a news program (they are starting one but it hasn't come on the air yet). If so, then it would make sense to remove the "at times" and use the word "significant" before the word "news" (not to have any significant news presence).

  • This is a correct impression, but they were also the only Big Three-owned station without news at other times in their history and this has not been the case for the entire time they've been a CBS affiliate.
  • One possible way to say it could be... From assuming the affiliation in 1994 to 1999, from 2002 to 2009 and again from 2012 onward, WWJ-TV holds a dubious distinction as the only station directly owned by either of the "Big Three" networks not to have any significant news presence. Think that could work?
Yes, this is better.
  • although the network continued to evaluate options. should be although the network continued to evaluate other options.
  • Done.
@Nathan Obral: Responded to your comments. Sammi said she's busy so I'll wait for her comments. Rlink2 (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
@Rlink2, I had already responded to some, and Nathan looks like he picked up the rest. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:02, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
@Sammi Brie @Nathan Obral
I gave it another look, and everything seems fine to me. I made minor copyedits, feel free to revert any of them if you think its not necessary. Other than that, looks ready for promotion to me. Rlink2 (talk) 23:49, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Promoting is something you do at GA by editing the talk page, @Rlink2... WP:GA/I Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
@Sammi Brie
I know, I'm saying I'm ready to do that. The more accurate wording should have been "looks ready to be passed" than "promoted". I think it's ready for passing, because I think all issues have been resolved. I just wanted to give you two the opporunity for any last words before I pass the GA ;) Rlink2 (talk) 00:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
@Rlink2: No worries! Just took a look at the copyedits, and I think everything should be resolved and ready to go. :) Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 00:33, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
@Rlink2: Everything looks good. Thank you so much for the review. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:34, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Yeah no problem, sorry for the delay. In the future I will make sure to complete the review shortly after opening the page and not 3 weeks. Rlink2 (talk) 00:41, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Is it verifiable with no original research?

Most sources are from old newspapers, which I guess is because its dealing with a different part of history. Looks relaible though. No problems with citing templates or anything of that sort. And all links archived (not an actual requirement but I personally think its nice).

Is it broad in its coverage?

Yes.

Is it neutral?

Yes, everyones viewpoint was represented fairly I would say. But again, this is not the type of article for people to push biased stuff on. Maybe in the lead, instead of made only brief and partial attempts use made multiple unsucessful attempts and remove the However at the beginning of that sentence.

Is it stable?

yes

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

yes, with relevant tags and metadata.

Local newscasts were "unsuccessful"? Comment

The lede currently states, "The station has made multiple unsuccessful attempts at producing local newscasts in its more than 25 years under CBS ownership." How do you define "unsuccessful"? Although the previous 11pm newscast and the later "First Forecast Mornings" did not last long, suffered from low ratings and were eventually cancelled, both programs were successfully produced and broadcast by the station for several years each.--Thomprod (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

"Unsuccessful" in this case had more to do with a lack of faith by ownership and, believe it or not, ownership turnover. Channel 62 has been under CBS control since 1994 but technically changed owners several times (the original CBS, Inc. —> Westinghouse —> CBS Corp. —> the first Viacom —> CBS Corporation —> ViacomCBS (now Paramount Global). The 11 p.m. attempt with WKBD happened under the first Viacom's watch, and that iteration of Viacom outside of the CBS stations was not into local news production, with KSTW and WTOG also having local news ops shuttered at or around the same time. Plus it marked a strong reversal for Viacom after WKBD's 10 p.m. newscast faltered badly in the ratings post-1994, and yet they still used it to help establish an effort for channel 62.
First Forecast Mornings, despite having a very decent run and not that much overhead (borrowing heavily from WWJ radio and the Detroit News) just didn't have the backing of then-management at CBS. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 20:56, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:WWJ-TV/Archive_1&oldid=1084374547"