Talk:WLS-TV

message: :Image:Wls weather.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) 21:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Wls weather.JPG

message: Yeah.. I am half on wikipedia and half watching ABC 7 and uh.. this car just ran ito the studios DURING the broadcast! It was a big crash and the Anchor went WHOA!! Trying to find a pictuere of it. http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=5852858 04:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A local news event, that might be worth reporting on Wikinews.  On a Wikipedia scale, it's trivia, and to say anything more than that it happened is potentially giving the story undue weight.  90.203.45.168 (talk) 18:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Car crashes into ABC 7 Studios 

message: :Image:WLSTVABC7.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) 12:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:WLSTVABC7.png

message: The entire section isn't even encyclopedic.  This is not WikiNews.
Furthermore, there are questions about copyright violations and WP:BLP.  Before any of that material gets re-added, I would ask editors to review WP:COPYVIO and WP:BLP/WP:HARM.  Thanks. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have a problem I suggest you take it to the BLP noticeboard. It is the most notable and noted event in the history of the station, and we are not sensored. You can quote as many random policies as you like but the 100 words we have now are fine and a firmly oppose the censoring of the man's name, which is public free information. HARM is nice, but it is nothing more than an essay, it has been rejected as a policy b/c out first priority is facts , freedom, and openness. Not that this does any harm since his name is all over the place now. It just makes wikipedia look lame. Lobojo (talk) 15:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Squawk all you want, Lobojo, but BLP says you can't damage someone just for kicks. This is non-notable and potentially damaging to a private citizen. If you disagree, take it up with Jimbo. Jeffpw (talk) 15:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect others might argue about that being the most noted event of the station.  Nonetheless, it's not encyclopedic - it's trivial news. What makes Wikipedia look lame is when people try to put sensational tabloid news into an encyclopedia. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

text: For an article of the current length, it might be undue weight.  However, if the article was expanded to a WP:GA length, breadth and depth, the current section would be appropriate.  Thus, I would say just keep it up to date with concise recaps of the evolution of the story.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD)  19:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minivan 

message: Does anyone find a regular revert-war to be helpful to the project?  I would suggest one of you bring this to the BLP noticeboard, or create an RfC.  That is the standard process.  Thanks.Wjhonson (talk) 22:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert Warring

message: :Image:Wbkb60s.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 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) 03:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Wbkb60s.jpg

message: I feel that we should split sections "news operations" and "news personnel" into their own article called ABC 7 News (WLS-TV). The reason "(WLS-TV)" would be included in the article title is because KGO-TV is also known as "ABC 7 News" during newscasts. Mythdon (talk) 05:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ABC 7 News (WLS-TV) 

message: Is all the information accurate in the article? A friend just tested 44.1 as Telemundo, and 44.41 as an ABC station. And AFAIK, there is no more ABC News Now on digital subchannels. MMetro (talk) 03:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Digital Channel Information

message: The Wikipedia Manual of Style on heading (WP:HEAD) says that:
*headings within articles should not contain wikilinks -- the links should be included in the text of the section instead;
*the Wikipedia style for capitalizing headings is to use "sentence case" instead of "title case", e.g.,
:Important things to know about this subject
not:
:Important Things to Know About This Subject
This may be unfamiliar to many editors who believe that or have been taught that "title case is the right way to capitalize headings". It isn't the "right way", it is one style. Wikipedia has, for better or worse, chosen to follow a different style, i.e., capitalize the heading the same way you would capitalize any sentence:
*capitalize the first word, 
*capitalize any proper nouns (people, places, organizations), and 
*begin all other words with lower case letters
In addition, I have changed the heading "On-Air Talent" to "On-air staff". "Talent" is industry jargon. It does not describe the position or the work. It is meaningless to readers unfamiliar with American broadcast industry jargon, and is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. "Staff" indicates that these people are being listed because they work for the station. Ground Zero | t 02:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Headings

message: Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to the list of names in articles. This type of material in articles does not abide by current consensus and its inclusion is strongly discouraged in policies and guidelines. this list of names fall into:
#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.  
#As per WP:V, we cannot include information in Wikipedia that is not verifiable and sourced. 
# 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. 
#Per WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.
the whole section was unsourced and was unnecessarily long, risking the article being difficult to read, navigate, and comprehend.Bobjim45 (talk) 08:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  news team 

message: I have removed the full staff due to what was posted above and per Talk:WGN-TV#News_team. List like these needs to establish notability. Being that the station's own website is a primary source, thus does NOT count towards demonstrating a person's notability. Bobjim45 (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  On-air staff list  

message: I have removed the full staff due to what was posted above and per Talk:WGN-TV#News_team. List like these needs to establish notability. Being that the station's own website is a primary source, thus does NOT count towards demonstrating a person's notability. Bobjim45 (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  On-air staff list  

message: This should probably get a mention, but I can't find decent refs; the closest I've found is an article in the Billboard July 20, 1985 issue (starting on page 35) but as thorough as it is it has incomplete information with regard to the history of the program. Mapsax (talk) 14:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Rock On Chicago'' 

message: The info box claims that there is a VHF Channel 7 Translator Application, with no further citation. I have now added a citation needed box to it, but this is to dispute removal of the text. Techy95 (talk) 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonexistent Translator