Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Radio Stations/Archive 2006

message: I proposed a new stub, , in Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. While most US radio stations have been put under , I've seen some in . A new sub-category would help alleviate confusion, and also help declutter the :Category:United States broadcasting stubs by giving the radio station stubs their own stub template. DHowell 05:17, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have created the template  and :Category:United States radio station stubs. I don't know how it should get populated, though; manually, or with a bot of some sort. DHowell 00:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I have created templates and categories for the UK and Canada: /:Category:United Kingdom radio station stubs, /:Category:Canada radio station stubs. --Marknew 10:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New stub proposal 

message: I've updated WP:NC's section on article titles for broadcast stations, both with and without call signs, to reflect what I believe is the consensus view both here and in the technical side of the profession.  I'd like to yank most of the discussion on WP:WPRS in favor of a reference to WP:NC, leaving only the more situation-specific details here.  Comments?  121a0012 02:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title discussion updated on WP:NC 

message: I updated this, as the old wording indicated local radio/tv stations were deemed non-notable, and not kept.  However, I beleive the typical local station is genrally found notable and kept by consensus in AFDs.  But low-power and non-licensed stations might not be included in that.  So, please see what I did, and revert/edit, if I got it wrong, and indicate any concerns at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Precedents#local broadcasters.  This isn't an official guideline, just a reflection of precedent.  A fuller discussion of proper guidelines might be warranted elsewhere (if it hasn't happened already).  --Rob 06:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Precedents]] 

message: I have been looking through the radio station templates for markets (ie. San Diego FM), and noticed that nobody is including broadcast FM translator stations.  Should translator stations ONLY be listed on the article of the radio station?  Should it NOT be included in the template that lists the FM stations for a particular market (ie. San Diego FM)?  I would appreciate any help as there are quite a few radio stations that broadcast on translators not included - which prevents a complete list of radio stations from being disclosed in a given radio market but I don't want to add this information without permission and/or in an improper format.  Transent 00:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question Regarding FM Translator Stations

message: Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Thanks a lot! Gflores Talk 17:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

message: I'm thinking we should have some sort of criteria for whether a past station should have its own article, or should be mentioned in the history of the article on the current station.  I have no doubt that legendary stations such as KMET and KNAC in Los Angeles should have their own articles.  KNX-FM is on the borderline, I could see it having its own article, but I also see it part of the history of KCBS-FM.  But does every Spanish station that has ever been on 93.5 FM (KMJR and KZAB) or 1540 AM (KSKQ, KXED, KXMG) need their own article? DHowell 22:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Past Stations 

message: I think we've established that low-power unlicensed (Part 15) microstations aren't generally encyclopedic, but what about low-power licensed stations? I've noticed that Michigan Technological University's WMTU has been speedily deleted twice for being non-notable, but it does indeed have an FCC license: . What do you think, should this be undeleted? In particular, this station has a construction permit to increase its power from 100 watts to 4.4 kW. DHowell 00:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not even a low-power station, as 47 CFR defines it; that's a full class-A.  (If it were a real low-power station, i.e., an LPFM, it would be WMTU-LP.)  I'm not sure that's enough to make it notable, though—there are 12,000 licensed stations, and not all of them are encyclopedia material.  I definitely don't think it's appropriate to speedy them without asking a subject-matter expert (e.g., the participants of this WikiProject).  121a0012 01:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The last speedy was for a club.  I don't consider that a speedy deletion criteria for a licensed station.  Also, the call sign seems to be WMTU-FM if I'm reading the FCC query results correctly.  Will likely undelete and put something in the talk about this not being a club. Vegaswikian 03:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: My opinion on LPFM's is that if they primarily broadcast satellite-fed programming (e.g. religious radio networks), there isn't much to put on the article. Those with local based programming (or local and satellite mixed) could have an article.--grejlen - talk 05:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low-power licensed stations 

message: As the program manager for a group of stations in Northern Michigan, I have noticed that some listeners and disgruntled employees have been using Wikipedia to post slanderous, misleading and other information, then referring to it on message boards and blogs. (Just check the history of Wfcx for an example.  I felt it necessary to make that change immediately.)   It would somewhat self serving for me to remove and edit such information, as it would look like I was trying to manipulate what was said about my stations.  I would be happy to start patrolling another section of stations to edit that material if someone could do so for my stations and area.  We could monitor and trade info about these posts and keep them factual.  Please send me an email if you are interested.   MarkElliott 14:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point of View Material 

message: As part of ongoing template categorization efforts, Cat:Radio templates and Cat:Radio navigational boxes have been created. 120 templates have been sorted into the latter so far, which just goes to show that people have been quite busy. The hope is that this will assist in template standarization and tracking across Wikipedia; you can help by adding any other templates you know of, as well as voicing your opinion on the current categorization hierarchy. –Unint 03:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template categorization 

message: I note that there is right now no wikipedia project to deal with radio programs.  Given the recent proliferation of podcasting shows, as well as the comparative dearth of information on a lot of the programs run by the various stations this project deals with, I think that it might make sense if the scope of this project were to be include to include the programs as well.  Thoughts?  Badbilltucker 13:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Expansion to Cover Radio Programs? 

message: For those of you working on radio station pages: Please take care when making links to AM and FM. Note that AM is a disambiguation page, and FM redirects to Frequency modulation, which may not be the ideal link. I've been working to disambiguate AM, and on radio station pages, I've generally been making the link to amplitude modulation to remain consistant with FM. If there's a better place, let me know. In general, should your project attempt to define consistant links for AM and FM? –RHolton≡– 20:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not part of this project, but I've made a request for an article in your todo list, so I thought I'd try to help. When you want to link "FM" or "AM" to their propoer contexts, you can use  or  templates I've just made. They output: "FM" and "AM". Shorten the name if you want, but the template should make the linking easier. --Chris Griswold 02:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind the article request; found Jack FM and Bob FM. --Chris Griswold 02:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to AM and FM 

message: Hi WikiProject Radio, I've been working on the entry for KPSU and wanted to insert KPSU into this template which I find at the bottom of many Portland, Oregon radio entries:
Is that possible?  Do you know where those templates are hiding?Katsam 06:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are at: Template:Portland(OR) FM and Template:Portland(OR) FM. Oh, and I've added them in for you. Cheers! --Ckatz 06:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A question about radio templates.

message: Hello! We at the Work via WikiProjects team previously contacted you to identify the quality articles in your WikiProject, and now we need a few more favors. We would like you to identify the "key articles" from your project that should be included in a small CD release due to their importance, regardless of quality. We will use that information to assess which articles should be nominated for Version 0.5 and later versions.  Hopefully it will also help you identify which articles are the most important for the project to work on. As well, please keep updating your Arts WikiProject article table for articles of high quality. If you are interested in developing a worklist such as this one for your WikiProject, or having a bot generate a worklist automatically for you, please contact us.  Thanks! Walkerma 04:35, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key articles for Wikipedia 1.0 

message: Is Radio Free Gilbertsville, which claims an ERP of 400 milliwatts, a station that merits an article per Wikipedia inclusion guidelines? Bearcat 23:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's clearly not an LPFM as that term is understood; LPFMs have ERPs in the range of 10 W to 100 W.  So it's probably an unlicensed Part 15 operation, in which case the presumption should certainly be against it, lest every iPod FM adapter be included.  Does it have actual, measurable listenership?  Does it get mentioned in the local press?  What sort of programming does it have?  Does it have a Web site?  (It fails the Google test.)  As it stands, the article bears all the hallmarks of a vanity article. 121a0012 01:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is a website; it's present as an external link on the article, but appears to be little more than a subpage of the region's arts committee (who also seem to be the operators of the station). It claims to reach "the village and some outlying areas not blocked by the hills", and also claims the unofficial callsign WRFG (which is actually assigned to a real station in Atlanta.) From the site, it looks like arts and community programming on weekends only; there are no claims as to actual measured listenership. Bearcat 21:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability question

message: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KRES. Duly licensed station; legitimate (though stubbish) article. Bearcat 02:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Radio AFD

message: I just cleaned up this above Category and added the missing subcategories and put the appropriate "articles" which shouldn't have been there, into their appropriate categories and left the section with only the Categories showing. I still have to go to the individual subcategories and make sure they have all of their appropriate Category links as well. I also added missing information related to St. John's, in the article on St. John's. Most were radio stations that were relocated to NFLD radio categories and the radio category was placed into this major Category. WayneRay 21:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is entirely normal and correct for media outlets in a city to be filed in that city's own dedicated category, if there is one; the alternative would be to create a separate :Category:St. John's media category. Filing :Category:Radio stations in Newfoundland and Labrador as a subcategory of :Category:St. John's is flat out wrong, because that category also includes a lot of stations that aren't in St. John's. You took something which was completely correct and made it all wrong. Bearcat 20:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:St. John's]]

message: The page says: A radio station should never be filed directly in Category:Radio stations, except in the rare circumstance where it would be impossible to create a more appropriate subcategory.
:Yeah?; that sounds severe.  This needs an explanation --Otherwise, we should make a lot of sub-categories for stations and station formats.  Formats are the defining reason why people listen to stations.
::It makes sense, though.  There is no good reason to create a category which would be so large as to be ultimately useless. If such were done, I have no doubt that the banner currently on :Category:People from Texas, would be put there too.  Regarding the suggestion for subcategory ideas, I would think that probably the best and most useful subcategories would be Stations by state, Stations by city, and, yes, program-format categories.  The one major question there is coming up with sufficiently transparent names for formats such that any comparatively uninformed user would recognize them immediately.  I would think country, gospel, jazz, rock, R&B, religious, easy listening, news, news/talk, and so on would be generally recognized, but such as "'hot' adult contemporary country" might be a bit too specific.  However, I can certainly agree to having categories or sub-categories which are fairly immediately obvious created.  Badbilltucker 13:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There already are a lot of subcategories for radio stations by location and/or format. Bearcat 19:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Radio stations & categories

message: I believe it would be useful if we, when possible added the assessments that the editorial team is using to identify articles to be published (see first comment on this talk page). If we categorize our articles I could send them a list of the most organized and useful articles that have been built through this project, as they asked for them earlier. What do you all think?
PeteShanosky 15:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using the assessments 

message: There's some kind of technical snafu affecting the market and state templates on WOLT-FM and WOLI-FM, causing the second template to embed in the first one. Can somebody who knows more than I do about how to code and fix templates look at these two and fix whatever's broken? Thanks. Bearcat 19:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Templates

message: Even though I'm not part of this project, I stumbled across this site, it is TV/FM/AM query all in one, and compiles data directly from the FCC database. It is a lot better than the FCC database, showing former callsigns, a contour map, and other vital info all on the same page....is there any way we can replace the TV/AM/FM query with this? CFIF ☎ 00:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If it were going to be replaced, I'd probably go with the somewhat more official CDBS query, although that unfortunately has two different entry points depending on whether you want current information or applications.  To do it right would involve using the Facility ID Number instead of the callsign.  121a0012 04:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replace AM/FM query? 

message: Hi!  I did a couple of articles some months ago that you may find of interest.  They are KPLM-FM and KWXY-FM.  Thanks!! - Lucky 6.9 04:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two older articles 

message: Is there any merit to a series of disambiguation lists at 89.1, 89.3, etc to show current and former stations at specific frequencies? Might provide a place to stick some of the smaller, non-encyclopedic-as-a-full-article data, and would link for people like me who want to know what their presets for KC will run into when they get to Denver. -- nae'blis 21:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frequency disambiguation 

message: Hello. I heard about a kiss station in portlan maine, and was wondering if anyone could tell me the call number. if i were to know, i would start an article for it. thanks!  Jmclark911 17:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  KISS/Portland Maine 

message: Under section 176 of the Broadcasting Act 1990, TV schedules and programme information require royalties to be paid to the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 (which is collected by Broadcasting Dataservices (BDS)). Publishing a schedule without paying a royality is a criminal offence. I believe this could also apply to BBC Radio services and maybe commercial network services too.
* Broadcasting Dataservices (BDS) network radio page
* Broadcasting Act 1990 - section 176
I have two questions:
# Does it affect BBC Network radio stations, and commericial network radio stations?
# What does this mean for editors who put schedules for UK radio stations in Wikipedia, regardless of its unencyclopedic status (section 1.7.3. of WP:WWIN). Would the fact that the servers are based in the United States make a difference if someone posted a schedule? --tgheretford (talk) 16:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential legal issue with UK Radio station schedules 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages: 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
*User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
*User:Badbilltucker/Science directory
and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory.
The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. 
It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Directory 

message: I gave this thing an infobox and a better history section. TTV (MyTV|PolygonZ|Green Valley) 00:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[KTAR]] 

message: On :Wikipedia:WikiProject/List of proposed projects, there is a new project proposed that would deal with those aspects of radio not covered by this existing projects. The temporary project page is also available at :User:Badbilltucker/WikiProject Radio. Any parties interested in either project are encourage to indicate their interest on either or both pages. Thanks. Badbilltucker 15:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be nice to have a Wikiproject Radio, since there is no generic wikiproject for it. The radio station project could become either a descendent wikiproject or possibly be merged into the main. Please show your interest on the proposal. --PhantomS 03:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New proposal for WikiProject Radio 

message: Beginning cross-post.
:See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 23:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stablepedia 

message: More Phoenix radio news involving the KTAR group/written by Shin'ou's TTV (Futaba|Masago|Kotobuki) 02:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  KTAR...again 

message: The issue has been raised that the international generic parent category :Category:College radio stations should be renamed to a more inclusive term which recognizes that different countries have different names for this radio format. The country-specific categories should certainly maintain their existing names; the question is what's the most appropriate name for the international umbrella category. I've initiated a discussion at Category talk:College radio stations to discuss this. Please come participate. Thanks. Bearcat 19:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: College radio stations

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards