Talk:The Really Big Show

message: Rizzo show needed a page. Nothing here should be considered controversial or editorial in nature. It's a rundown of the content of his show and how it differs from typical sports shows in the market. Sportsboytony 18:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is going to need sources cited to demonstrate that it's not any more than a local radio show. You'll want to check WP:BIO for guidelines. Articles are meant to be judged on a case-by-case basis, but typically, local radio and television shows aren't considered notable enough without significant out-of-market coverage. DarkAudit 18:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a search engine. The article is going to have to show why he's notable outside of his market, and cite outside sources to prove it. DarkAudit 19:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not mean to imply that local radio hosts are automatically excluded, just that by the generally accepted community standards, they need to show that they have done something to set themselves apart from other local radio show hosts. If they are of little interest to someone outside the local area, there's little chance of them passing muster with editors here. If there are awards and other media coverage independent of the subject, then include it, and cite it. DarkAudit 21:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, radio shows are not out by default, its just that there are so many radio shows that the ones that are included in Wikipedia will have to give evidence as to why they are notable.  If you can cite verifiable, third-party sources as to why this radio show is important on a bigger scale that just one little town, it probably wouldn't be deleted.  Useight 22:50, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I second that notion.  The show itself is unworthy of its own wikipedia entry, but Tony Rizzo occasionally contributes to national sports radio programing and may possibly merit his own page.  AlphaEta 00:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :Image:ShaverRizzo.jpg 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 01:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:ShaverRizzo.jpg

message: :Image:Rizzofox.jpg 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 (talk) 22:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Rizzofox.jpg

message: To whom it may concern - 
Given that RBS has had some national notoriety filling in for Jim Rome, and being featured in the "Draft Day" movie (and has had a 3X Super Bowl winner - Jerod Cherry join the show), it more than pases the WP:N smell test, thus is worthy of an article.
Vjmlhds - NO SOCKS HERE, BABY! (talk) 05:00, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Certain editors believe it was a disruptive edit on my part to revive the article - untrue (boy, some people like throwing around accusations).  The show has enough going for it as far as WP:N goes to warrant an article.  Yes the article had merged nearly 3 years ago, but a lot has happened since then - especially being featured in a movie. Vjmlhds - NO SOCKS HERE, BABY! (talk) 05:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  :I'm not yet taking a position as to whether or not The Really Big Show should be split from WKNR.  I do insist, however, that the article be nominated for a split and that a thorough discussion take place.  The consensus from multiple editors in February 2012, myself included, was that the subject of the WKNR morning show did not meet WP:GNG.  Levdr1lp / talk 05:11, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

text:  This should probably be posted at the WKNR talk page as the "Really Big" target is only a redirect.  As for the apology, see your talk-- I had a legitimate concern, but I would've preferred to see the SPI case closed much sooner.  Levdr1lp / talk 05:51, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revival 

message: Being as the show is consistently ranked in Talkers magazine's Heavy Hundred sports talk shows, I would think that that gives it the gravitas needed to satisfy any WP:N concerns about "not receiving significant coverage" outside of Cleveland, thus being worthy of an article.
Vjmlhds (talk) 19:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talkers Heavy Hundred