Talk:Talksport

message: CHECK and MATE to those intent on disrupting Wikipedia Yellowmellow45 18:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attempt at Resolution 

message: There seems a disappointing lack of info on the change from Talk Radio to talksport, why this happened, who arranged it, what happened to the presenters etc etc. Magic Pickle 00:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For some reason the slightly mad anon contributor refuses to accept that the traffic and news teams are "presenters" and reverts back on sight, going over the 3RR in the process if need be... --Kiand 00:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of station history? 

message: It has the lowest audience of any national station? That must be untrue -- anybody heard of 1Xtra, 3C, etc., etc.? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew.boulton (talk • contribs) 2006-05-20
:Indeed it is - its actually the 7th highest commercial national in the latest RAJAR figures. Theres at least 15 commercials and a few BBC's behind it. Both 1Xtra and 3C actually do fairly well, mind - the lowest figure goes to Fun Radio, and thats just among those who pay to be reported. --Kiand 10:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lowest audience

message: As I discussed on some BBC radio articles, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not under section 1.7.7 states that Wikipedia is not a TV/Radio guide. Rather than delete the information in the schedule, would it be better for someone with knowledge of TalkSPORT edited the schedule and make it into sections like Presenters and Programmes? Sonic 08:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone just deleted the schedule as I was writing the above comment. My suggestion still stands. Sonic 08:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schedule - Unencyclopedic? 

message: I've just gone through this page and done what I could to get the opening section into better shape. The vast amount of text before the TOC was ridiculous, so I've put most of that into a history section and just left the basic details at the beginning.
I haven't even bothered touching the presenters section, but it's pretty clear there's way too much information there. It reads too much like advertising material. I really don't think we need to detail every single programme on the station... it's just too unwieldy. It needs to be trimmed back to remove the, uh... less notable... presenters/programmes. It'd be cool if someone more in the know about the station could tackle it. 
I've made another section into which I've put the most recent programming developments at the station. This can be edited as necessary for those who like to tell everyone about what's going on lately at talkSPORT.
Furthermore, I have no idea what purpose the large list of presenter names with links is meant to serve... the bit below the Twenty20 Cup Live section. Can anyone justify keeping it? If not I'm going to delete it in a few days time. I'm also looking at the ratings section as needing a good clearout, because it's so shamelessly POV and far too long for the average reader to give a damn.
Any thoughts?
--EddieBernard 10:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs an overhaul 

message: There's an AFD on Alice Soundtech, a leading UK supplier of studio and transmission equipment for ILR and RSL radio stations (from mixing consoles to AM/FM transmitters) also operating some transmission sites for TalkSPORT and Virgin Radio. People in the biz or in the know can chime in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Soundtech. -- 62.147.39.76 10:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFD on company operating TalkSPORT transmission sites 

message: I've cleaned up one major bit of POV for The Jon Gaunt Show, hopefully someone can expand on the description for that show and go through the other shows with a fine toothcomb for other WP:NPOV violations. --tgheretford (talk) 21:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And as soon as I do that, someone else has added what I believe is a WP:NPOV violation (diff). As I am not prepared to violate WP:3RR, can someone suggest what else I can do apart from whack a POV template to the section? --tgheretford (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What I will try and say is that either the information placed in the article be verified with reliable sources, otherwise as per WP:V and WP:NPOV policy as well as WP:WEASEL guidelines, it can be removed. --tgheretford (talk) 00:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: There has been some very libelous statements apperaing on the politics section of the page such as describing him as a anti-semite and supporter of the terrorist organisation, Hezbollah. I have reworded it for the moment, but it is being repeatedly reverted or changed. As the politics section doesnt seem relevent, perhaps it is time to remove this section. Willow177 (talk) 21:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK I just reverted some of the comments above that were changed by the anon IP 87.194.90.253 (talk). S/he edited the comments by Charliewbrown (talk) as well Willow177 (talk) so that it appears as if they agreed that Galloway is an anti-semite when in fact the original statements were to the contrary.  Unfortunately we were all fooled by this...And to you, anon IP 87.194.90.253 (talk): this is your final warning, if you persist in this behavior of editing against consensus and changing other editor's comments, you will be banned. --Nuttycoconut (talk) 16:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I noticed that as soon as the semi-protection has ended, the libellous biographies of living persons policy violations have resumed. I don't know whether we should also request page protection again as well as report the relevant user at the incidents noticeboard for administrators? --tgheretford (talk) 22:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Galloway 

message: I am getting a little tired with the constant adding of potentially libellous details to this article about George Galloway. This is explicitly a violation of the biographies of living persons policy. Just because this isn't an article about a person doesn't mean it is acceptable - BLP applies to all Wikipedia articles. If information is being added back in, then please feel free to remove it immediately as per BLP policy, add the relevant template (adding unreferenced controversial information about living persons) from here and if it continues, report it at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. --tgheretford (talk) 12:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that as soon as the semi-protection has ended, the libellous biographies of living persons policy violations have resumed. I don't know whether we should also request page protection again as well as report the relevant user at the incidents noticeboard for administrators? --tgheretford (talk) 22:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:BLP|Biographies of living persons]] Violation 

message: " ... traditionalist attitudes towards issues such as capital punishment, immigration, and the ongoing military action in Iraq and Afghanistan". A circumlocution, I'd say: unless the tradition is crudity and pig ignorance.  --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 20:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traditionalist Attitudes 

message: Main page mentions the return of Talk Radio - a talk-only station running parallel to TalkSPORT on DAB - in July 2008 but AFAIK nothing has happened.  Any news?  Looks like this section of the page needs revision.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alansausse (talk • contribs) 04:35, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Return of Talk Radio 

message: Excuse the lack of vocabulary here, I'm into Law not Literacy so much.
Under the header "Controversies" on the first bullet point: "a call from someone who wanted to shoot the Royal Family"
Legally this is incorrect. He expressed the sentiment of them being shot.
Also noting that barely anyone who called this fellow's show viewed it as anything but serious. No prosecution of this caller resulted. And Sedition is not personal intent. Thus the above is incorrect.
It may also be a trivial note to add that Boyd also claims to have wandered off in his mind, as the caller was mourning the death of the Queenmother and had heard it several times before that day.
89.100.60.94 (talk) 11:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal Grammatical Error 

message: This article is unfortunately recentist, concentrating on Talksport post-rebrand without going into much detail about its time as Talk Radio UK and Talk Radio. For example, the 'programming highlights' and 'controversies' sections which list events not particularly distantly separated in time begin after the rebrand, mysteriously not saying anything about the station before it was known as Talksport, and the 'former presenters' sections talks about Talksport's original line-up, which I think means the line-up at the point of the rebrand (James Whale was on at midnight and I remember listening!).
The article does not mention when the 'UK' on the end of the name was unceremoniously dropped. One thing that might also merit inclusion since the format from the outset was wall-to-wall phone-in is the phone number the station used and its changes over the years (not because the numbers themselves are important but because the pricing of calls is highly relevant to a phone-in station, given that people waiting on the line can potentially be a significant source of revenue). As I recall it started off as the local rate 0345 105389 and at some point became a free 0500 number, before changing back to something that charged (possibly more than a local rate), but I don't know when these changes occurred. Finally, are the medium wave frequencies used vacated BBC ones from the days before widespread FM reception? If so, what was on them before, and when they were freed up was it always intended to license a new national independent talk radio broadcaster, or might we have had a music station like Virgin/Absolute Radio instead? Since national wall-to-wall phone in was new to the UK in 1995, I wonder if anyone can dig up anything about how the new station was received when it went on air. Were analogies drawn, for example, with AM talk radio in the USA?
Can future editors of this article try to bear in mind what I've said here about recentism, and look at this station in a broader historical perspective in which everything notable that has happened from 1995 (and potentially before) to the present is equally important. Credulity (talk) 18:17, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk Radio (UK) era 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Talksport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120503235834/http://radiotoday.co.uk/news.php?extend.3389 to http://radiotoday.co.uk/news.php?extend.3389
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100329122126/http://www.utvpitch.co.uk:80/about/sport-magazine/ to http://www.utvpitch.co.uk/about/sport-magazine/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Talksport. 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:
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/686c4mNb1 to http://www.rajar.co.uk/listening/quarterly_listening.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:52, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect TalkSPORT.com. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  The Banner talk 14:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "TalkSPORT.com" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: See here. 1107 kHz Torbay no longer works, so it looks like this has been turned off. The transmitter site was here and the service began in 1995.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 09:37, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seven medium wave transmitters to be turned off in 2020 

message: The current version under live sport heading states "FA Cup final (simulcast with BBC Radio 5 Live)" - normally in broadcast terms I've always taken a "simulcast" as being the broadcast of the same programme on multiple stations. It would be unlikely that Talksport and the BBC would be broadcasting the same programme - i.e. the same commentators and presenters. While it could be quite possible that the event would be broadcast on both stations, they would most likely have two completely separate broadcast teams.
It's not unusual for the same matches to be covered by multiple broadcasters and indeed the section introduction notes that some events are "non exclusive" as such I would have thought the simulcast with BBC 5Live reference is not needed. Unless my assumption that it is two separate programmes is incorrect in which case it would be worthy of note.
--Philedmondsuk (talk) 19:40, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA Cup Final