Talk:Bally Sports Great Lakes

message: I've removed a loaded, POV paragraph about STO's business practices and the editor's personal opinion about same.  IMHO, it'd be fine for a section to be added about the tough negotiating stance from STO, and the prickly relations it's produced with some cable/satellite operators, but it needs to be much less "loaded" than the item I reverted.  And it seems almost a moot point right now, with nearly all the local cable operators on board with STO - even Cox, which put up a website complaining about the rights fees STO wanted, is now a carrier.  MPWard 23:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  STO Controversy 

message: :Image:SportsTime Ohio logo.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 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) 05:20, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SportsTime Ohio logo.png

message: When I saw this article, I noticed that it had not been changed when the Cleveland Indians and the AAA Buffalo Bisons failed to renew their affiliation contract before the 2009 season. As the Indians' AAA affiliate is now the Columbus Clippers, this information was out of date, so I noted that the Bisons are a former AAA affiliate of the team. Also, I noted the level of the Lake County Captains in the minor league system, as this was not previously noted. Rdubz3000 (talk) 06:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Information Has Been Changed 

message: I noticed that many of the broadcasters' names were shown as red links. Because they did not link to articles about their respective names, I removed those links. Also, I removed the Mark Schwab link because it led to an article about a different person named Mark Schwab, and Wikipedia does not have an article about the Mark Schwab who broadcasts for SportsTime Ohio. Rdubz3000 (talk) 07:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biographical Links 

message: Please don't put anything in the article regarding Browns coverage until it's known if STO is still an official TV partner of the team.  
With the new deal with WEWS, it's unknown if STO will still be on board as an official team partner (STO and WKYC are connected in many ways - including address - so STO may not partner up with WEWS).
STO can still do Browns shows if they like, but they'd have to "roll their own", and not have the Browns name as part of the title.
Vjmlhds (talk) 19:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: While it's certainly possible that the Browns have ended their official partnership w/ STO, it's just as likely that nothing has changed.  Both WKYC and STO shared official team programming, so WEWS-TV and STO could just as easily do the same.  And I have no doubt the public will receive more and more information on official Browns TV (& radio) programming as the 2015 season nears.  Levdr1lp / talk 19:52, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, I repeat - the burden of proof is on you to verify that the Browns and STO are still in business.  All I did was remove any mention of STO, as it's unknown (though doubtful) that they are still a Browns TV partner.  If there's no mention of STO, then there's no reason to verify anything.  If I say the sun is blue, then I'd need to verify it to add it to that article, but if I don't add it in the first place, there's nothing there that I'd need to verify.  The safe thing is to leave STO out until we know for sure.  Vjmlhds (talk) 16:45, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  There should be no question that STO was a broadcast partner for the Browns for the 2014 NFL season; multiple reliable sources independent of the subject exist verifying this fact.  There remains, however, uncertainty as to whether or not that partnership will continue through the 2015 season.  Given the absence of a reliable source to support your claim regarding STO for 2015, there is no basis to change existing verified content prior to the 2015 season/preseason (by then it will become obvious whether or not STO continues its partnership).  We are between seasons; common practice on this site is to leave things unchanged unless and until reliable sources present themselves which justify changing/modifying/correcting/updating existing content verified with previously existing reliable sources.  Levdr1lp / talk 01:49, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  2014 is done and gone, we're in 2015 now. WEWS is confirmed, STO isn't.  WEWS has been verified, there's nothing to verify STO's involvement one way or the other.   I don't have to verify STO not being there because I simply don't bring STO up.  There's a difference between saying STO is no longer part of the team and flat out not mentioning them. Vjmlhds (talk) 02:59, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  As I stated in an earlier post, STO's status with the team is not dependent on the new WEWS-TV partnership.  For several years both STO and WKYC, another local TV outlet, shared official Browns coverage, so it's entirely possible that STO will be sharing coverage again in 2015, only this time with WEWS-TV instead of WKYC.  The point is that we don't know anything definitive regarding STO yet, so in the absence of any official word from the team or the network, we're left to wait until the new season begins.  At this point you're just making assumptions based on WP:OR to change the content of this article and .  Levdr1lp / talk 04:02, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Any WP:OR argument goes out the window when it comes to removing info.  If I added info and didn't cite it, then we can talk original research.  But simply removing any mention of a subject doesn't equal WP:OR.  If we don't know anything definitive, then wouldn't the more prudent approach be to simply not mention STO at all?   STO at this point is woulda/coulda/shoulda.  Last I checked Wikipedia isn't about woulda/coulda/shoulda, it's about what is. Vjmlhds (talk) 14:30, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  The point is we have no way of confirming anything has changed with respect to the STO-Browns partnership specifically.  There is no new reliable coverage on the STO-Browns partnership (or lack of one) which supersedes existing reliable coverage on the STO-Browns partnership.  All coverage to date confirms a partnership as of the 2014 season.  That's it.  There is no other coverage on STO & the Browns specifically, and the 2015 season hasn't arrived yet.   So there is no basis to remove sourced content, which is what you are attempting to do.  The question conveniently being overlooked here is "when does a broadcast partnership end?"  So far, I haven't seen anything to verify that the STO-Browns partnership has ended.  The team has a history of shared TV coverage, so the replacement of WKYC by WEWS-TV is not relevant.  All you've shared at this point (Drennan, 2014 season is over so the STO partnership is over, etc.) is speculation and/or WP:OR.  Levdr1lp / talk 17:42, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  For the sake of ending the back and forth, I'll stand down.  But this must be said...a network will more likely send out announcements when they have a sports property, than when they don't.  We're likely not gonna get some big press release from STO saying they lost the Browns - just not how things work. Vjmlhds (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Browns