Talk:WNEM-TV

message: Please do not edit out the former secondary affiliation of the WB and UPN.  The UPN site showed them as an affiliate.  I tried using archive.org but some how it is being redirected to the CW site.
The Flint Journal articles indicated that WNEM had WB and UPN affiliations.  No, I can not link to them as Flint Journal articles after 2 weeks are premium content.  Other Wikipedia Articles show WNEM as the UPN affiliate.
::That's not true. I've lived in Flint my whole life I don't remember WNEM as ever being a WB or UPN affiliate. WBSF used to be WB (its now CW). Flint never had a UPN affiliate (all we had was WKBD, which is also now CW). If you can prove me wrong with a reliable source please feel free. Buying that Flint Journal article would be a good idea. Until you do I removed it.TomCat4680 (talk) 13:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are not a good source.  I watched UPN programming on WNEM, perhaps you did not so you have no reason to "remember" WNEM as a UPN secondary affiliate.  I have add two sources for UPN and WB affiliates.  Spshu (talk) 16:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations for learning how to find a reliable source. Don't flame me, I add reliable sources to dozens of articles a week. Oh and by the way its illegal to have 2 affiliates of a commercial network (PBS doesn't count since its non-commercial) in the same market, so theres no way WNEM and WBSF could have been WB affiliates at the same time. TomCat4680 (talk) 19:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: WNEM and WBSF did not have the WB affiliation at the same time.  WBSF pick it up after WNEM dropped it, just can not seem to find a drop date for WNEM's WB affiliation end (or atleast WBSF pick up date/year).  It isn't exactly illegal just against standard contracts, earily on some affiliations were split between the exist channels.  Spshu (talk) 22:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secondary Affiliations 

message: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-meredith-time-inc-20171126-story.html
This proposed deal involves Time inc's assets and Meredith's assets coming into one entity. As of  November 2017 the Koch Brothers has been named as people involved in the deal. Its a pending deal that affects Meredith owned stations. 
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/business/dealbook/time-inc-meredith-corporation-koch-brothers.html?_r=0  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.86.14.44 (talk) 22:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Pending Deal with Meredith and Time inc

message: :Image:Wnem dt2 mntv.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 03:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Wnem dt2 mntv.PNG 

message: To the IP editor that edited under 107.40.213.96 and made the following comment: "Undid revision If you're going to slaughter an article that just expand it and find the sources for the info instead of littering with citation tags. This is called lazy and unexperienced editing talk."
No, I am complying with the concept and rules of WP to write encyclopedic article, not be a list dump. 
# I added sources for previous affiliations
# Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
# not a TV Guide
# If people would have source it first as the onus is on the original editor to source not the removing editor.  So I really don't have to include citation tags.
# Quit it with the insults like "lazy and unexperienced editing" after all that is against WP policy. --Spshu (talk) 18:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on WNEM-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for //www.upn.com/affiliates/michigan.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified