Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Radio Stations: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
reply
Line 386: Line 386:
:Long story short - it is impossible to place every station in one market and one market only, as many don't belong to any of the magic 302 and many reach many markets. In other words, there is no reasonable way to add a market column to [[List of radio stations in STATE]], hence why it was excluded in the redesign.
:Long story short - it is impossible to place every station in one market and one market only, as many don't belong to any of the magic 302 and many reach many markets. In other words, there is no reasonable way to add a market column to [[List of radio stations in STATE]], hence why it was excluded in the redesign.
:As for the individual market templates... yeah, that's another battle entirely. [[User:JPG-GR|JPG-GR]] ([[User talk:JPG-GR|talk]]) 17:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
:As for the individual market templates... yeah, that's another battle entirely. [[User:JPG-GR|JPG-GR]] ([[User talk:JPG-GR|talk]]) 17:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
::I think there was a debate some time ago about splitting the template into in market stations heard and out of market stations heard. I can think of several stations you could put in 6 or 7 market templates, and on the flipside I can think of several stations that lie far enough outside the primary market area that don't make it in to the "metro" as they say (the primary county/counties of the market) [[User:Mr mark taylor|Mr mark taylor]] ([[User talk:Mr mark taylor|talk]]) 19:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:16, 22 February 2008

Shortcut

format specific navboxes

I'd like some other opinions on format specific navboxes like Template:Classic Rock PA. This seems a bit too much to me. Does anyone see enough value in this to keep it around?--Rtphokie 22:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they have some value, if a format has enough of a presence in a state with a large enough station base to make a template worthwhile. I'd be interested in a "Country stations in Alabama" but don't think we need a "Sports talk in Idaho" template, for example. - Dravecky 01:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain to me by "large enough". Is five the minimum? Best regards --PorchME (talk) 22:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Station question

Can anybody review the notability of KEOS (Flagstaff, Arizona)? The article doesn't list the station's actual broadcast frequency, so as a Canadian with only limited knowledge of the American radio industry, I have no way of tracking down whether it should actually become a redirect to a current call sign in the Flagstaff market or not. Bearcat 23:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The station became KZKZ on 1981-09-24 and KVNA on 1986-07-15. If a source can be developed for the contents of the current article, it should be merged into KVNA, otherwise delete as unverifiable. (There should be a source for this information, such as old newspaper articles, directory listings, and ephemera issued by the station; this would probably take someone in the Flagstaff area to identify, probably through a local library or historical society.) 121a0012 00:59, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
KEOS is in College Station, Texas. --Jjc104 (talk) 00:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did find an article on KEOS in Flagstaff as AM 690, which is now defunct. Here's the source: http://las-solanas.com/arsa/stations_item.php?rsid=865
--Jjc104 (talk) 00:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simulcast stations

There are a number of large networks, many of which are religious formatted from what I've seen, we should consider collapsing into a single article. I'm talking about instances where there are a bunch (several dozen in some cases) of fully licensed stations that do not appear to produce any of local content. Localized sounders or station ids don't count either. If 100% of the content is produced at some flagship station, I'm thinking that the network stations articles should be merged into either the flagship station's page or the network's page (if one exists). An less than complete list:


Don't get me wrong. If there is local news or some other locally produced content (heck I'll even count "radio swap shop" in a pinch), then that station is contributing to the local community enough to be notable. But if it's all produced elsewhere and the only purpose the station serves is to extend the reach of the network, then it needs to be merged into the parent article. It's often difficult to tell which of these stations actually have local content and which don't, just based on their websites or even listening to them as these often tiny stations often go to great lengths to appear more notable than they really are. Anyone have some experience with this kind of radio (either religious radio or network radio in general), interested in helping tackle this? Any tips on determining the flagship station would be appreciated as well. Networks which have had merge proposal tags added to all station pages are striked out above. --Rtphokie (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless a station provides a reasonable amount of local programming or has an important history before being acquired by the greater network, I agree. However, before you merge any of these outright, be sure to use the appropriate {{merge}} tag, as there may be more to some stations than the articles show at the moment, and we should be sure no one watching them has anything to add first. JPG-GR (talk) 18:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the station/networks (Mainly the religious ones) utilize FM translators (which cannot broadcast their own programming) so those should be redirects anyway. Stations that carry programming like ESPN Radio and Fox Sports are on full powered FM & AM stations and many carry local programming/commercials. If it's a regional network of stations that simulcast (religious or otherwise), the outlying stations should just redirect to the main station. Mr mark taylor (talk) 22:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Add K-LOVE and Bible Broadcasting Network to the list. JPG-GR (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rare is the sports/talk station that carries a pure ESPN Radio or FOX Sports Radio program schedule. Most originate some programming, offer a mix of other programming (even if it's not always unique), and carry local or regional sports programming. This makes a simple re-direct problematic or inappropriate for these stations. - Dravecky (talk) 23:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I'm only talking about stations that carry 100% content provided by a single network source with no locally produced content at all. Those that carry 100% content provided by some other stations is another topic because, as you mention, it's difficult to redirect them somewhere else appropriate.--Rtphokie (talk) 23:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The analogy that comes to my mind as I look at it is similar to a television station that has an extensive network of repeaters (KUSA-TV is an excellent example). The central station (or in this case, the "network" or programmer) would be the core article, but not only would the individual stations be listed in those core articles, but the individual station entries would redirect to that network article (for completion-sake more than anything else). --Mhking (talk) 13:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, this is very similar to what's already done for television services (e.g. TVOntario or Vermont Public Television) which broadcast the same content over a large network of transmitters with no local variance in programming. In the television context, it most commonly applies to educational (e.g. Canadian provincial broadcasters, statewide American PBS affiliates) or religious networks. Bearcat (talk) 06:39, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If I am not mistaken (and since I don't listen, I probably am) I think WYFT does some form of local programming. I think it is your run-of-the-mill local religious program, but it is local. I would have to check on Wednesday when they come back from Christmas (nothing happens here on the 24th or 25th), but on the 26th, I will check to make sure. - NeutralHomer T:C 03:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Radio Disney is another one. Just my two cents before I go back to work. Happy holidays. --EnronsBack (talk) 01:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Radio Disney is really a different case. Nearly every station that runs Radio Disney programming has a distinct history as a commercial station (in some cases, like WMKI in Boston, as a fairly important station in the market's history). It's important not to lose this history in the rush to make everything a redirect to Radio Disney. I would note that only a very small number of Radio Disney affiliates (and no O&Os at all) run local programming; the only one I know of at the moment is WOLF et al. in Syracuse, and that's only a few hours a week. The typical Radio Disney "studio" consists of two rackmount servers and a satellite receiver, but the typical Radio Disney station is a heritage AM that fell on hard times (viz., WMKI, WOLF, WQEW, WDDZ, WRDZ, etc.). 121a0012 (talk) 05:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also some Radio Disney stations air programming outside of the Radio Disney Network. For the longest time WHKT in Portsmouth, Virginia aired Norfolk Admirals hockey and Norfolk Tides baseball. It is probably true of other stations too, that they (currently) air sports or other programming.
But the long histories of some of the stations, like 121a0012 said, puts the Radio Disney stations in a different category and shouldn't be merged. - NeutralHomer T:C 17:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salem Radio operates 3 different networks - a News/Talk, Contemporary Christian Music, and Religious Talk. The News/talk stations definitely do not meet this proposed criteria. While the bulk of the weekday programming is the same on many of their Owned and Operated stations (Bennett/Gallagher/Medved/Hewitt/Prager), the weekend programming is primarily brokered programming, most of which is locally produced (doctors, lawyers, car repair shops, health food stores, etc...).StreamingRadioGuide (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Air America? Most AAR stations carry only a handful of programs from the network and of the ones that do carry heavy AAR schedules almost all of them that I've encountered air at least some locally-originated programming. - Dravecky (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Jack" is a licensed brand name (owned in the U.S. by Bob "Cadillac Jack" Perry) and format concept, not a programming service. 121a0012 (talk) 04:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

planned stations

There have been a couple of concerns raised recently about articles associated with stations not yet on the air. WP:NOT#CRYSTAL is running up against "I thought all radio stations are automatically notable". Plans change and the "go-live" date gets pushed back in some cases. I wonder how many construction permits get issued and never get on the air.

Some thoughts about determining the notability of these stations.

  • possession of a construction permit does not provide instant notability.
  • references (preferable with a planned air date) should be provided to assert it's notability (and the FCC construction permit doesn't count)
  • all planned stations should be categorized into Category:Planned radio stations in the United States, once the station goes live, it should be removed from that category. If it stays there for more than 3 months it should be considered for deletion.

Also, is it time to add a notability section to WP:WPRS, at least as a reference? It could be useful in these AFD discussions.--Rtphokie (talk) 15:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually an essay in progress about this very topic at WP:Notability (media). We're trying to lay down some ground rules about when a media outlet is more likely than not to be found notable. We should probably avoid terms like "inherently" or "automatically" notable because it stirs up too much controversy. I'm on the fence about keeping these articles, but one point I can make is even if the station didn't go on the air, some other station would snap up that spot and the work we did on the first station would become part of the history of the second station. Squidfryerchef (talk) 17:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There's no sense in adding a notability section to WP:WPRS as any notability rules established by WP:WPRS don't amount to a hill of beans. Notability is decided by the greater project, not by a specialized area. JPG-GR (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Eventually it may be promoted to a guideline, not an essay. It was originally a proposed guidline ( it might still be tagged as such ) but most of us are more or less happy with the way it is. But if it does become a guideline it will have pull. But guideline or not, we need something to explain notability arguments related to broadcasting because many of the men of letters here on Wikipedia seem to think anyone can start their own radio station. Squidfryerchef (talk) 18:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CRYSTAL does not prohibit verifiable content related to the future; it prohibits unsourced speculation. If a planned radio station is properly sourced (the license details, etc.) and doesn't start speculating about details that haven't been confirmed yet, then it's a valid article topic and not a CRYSTAL violation. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help Needed

OK, WUSH (formerlly WNRJ) was supposed to take the WUSH calls. For some reason they are listed in the FCC database as "WUFH". Do we switch the page to the current "title" or leave it as is and see if it is an FCC mistake? - NeutralHomer T:C 18:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the editor of VARTV.com they are ID'ing as "WUSH Poquoson". - NeutralHomer T:C 19:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think there's no other real choice but to move it to WUFH with a re-direct at WUSH. If the FCC changes it to WUSH in the future then it's a simple matter of a few keystrokes to move it back and leave a redirect at WUFH. You might also put a bit of explanatory text at the top of the article to complement the note you have near the bottom to prevent well-intentioned errant changes back to WUSH. - Dravecky (talk) 19:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say leave it as WUSH for now, because they are already using the name WUSH. Could very well be a typo in the database. I'd give it some time to see if they correct it. Squidfryerchef (talk) 19:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are they identifying as "Wush" or as "W-U-S-H"? It wouldn't be the first time a station calls themselves something that sounds like their callsign but isn't actually really their callsign. JPG-GR (talk) 19:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"W-U-S-H". The editor of VARTV.com (who I have on IM as I type) emailed someone at Sinclair Communications (owner of WUSH) and they said they are WUSH. Squidfryerchef could be right, it could be a typo...or it could be a FCC goof, ala WOAY-TV.- NeutralHomer T:C 19:26, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would have no qualms against it being moved to WUFH (with the redirect) and moved back once the FCC corrects the mistake. - NeutralHomer T:C 19:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Being that even 100000watts.com is listing WUSH as WUFH, I have moved the page to WUFH until this whole thing gets cleared up....which probably won't be until after the New Year. - NeutralHomer T:C 13:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rock the categories

I just spent a few hours cleaning up the by-format categories after discovering, to my surprise, that there was only one article in Category:Album Oriented Rock radio stations. Now there are four. The badly-named Category:Alternative radio stations now has a whopping three articles. Should these be moved to join the 24 articles in the generic Category:Rock radio stations in the United States (they're all US stations) and the categories removed? Or does anybody have a useful strategy for adding proper category tags to the hundreds of station articles lack same in hopes of finding more AOR and alt-rock stations? - Dravecky (talk) 03:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say put them all in the main category for now. In the event more stations ever appear that could be fit in these subcategories, they can always be recreated. JPG-GR (talk) 07:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt the utility of categorizing music stations by format unless you can find an impartial, third-party source for determining the set of recognized formats. Many stations will give positioners when asked for their formats, and music stations can "report" to whatever chart or charts their management desires. The only outfit I know of which makes an independent judgment when assigning formats is Radio Journal/100000watts.com, and those are both for-pay services that are not particularly accessible to WP editors. (They still ask the station what their format is, but they then translate that into one or more of a few dozen standard formats identified in their database. Disclaimer: I know people who work for Critical Mass Media, the company that publishes both.) 121a0012 (talk) 07:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The challenge when it comes to categorizing by radio format is that radio stations themselves don't necessarily use the standard term for their format as their own self-descriptor. I've lost count of the number of times that I've had to undo edits which changed a radio station's format from active rock to "classic and new rock" or from adult hits to "hits of the 70s, 80s, 90s and today", which are not the names of radio formats, but descriptive statements about the formats. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roanoke Rapids Section?

I was poking around and I've noticed that while we have a Southside Virginia section to get those stations into a category, no such group exists for Roanoke Rapids, NC. It's led to disasters like WTRG. I was thinking about trying to put a template together for that area. Is there some Arbitron-related requirement, or can that be done? Should it be done? TripEricson (talk) 11:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should. You can include the stations from Emporia and add both NC and VA state templates. - NeutralHomer T:C 13:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I've created the template and run through and added the appropriate boxes to each linked page. Later on I may make pages for WEVA/WHFD/WNCM/WYTT but I definitely plan to clean up WTRG somewhat. Don't let that stop anyone else from jumping in if you want; there's plenty of stuff to do! TripEricson (talk) 18:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a few of the infobox and structural basics plus a couple of references to the WTRG article. I've recently discovered that the online Broadcasting & Cable archives can be a useful source of info as well as a handy reliable source for any radio article. - Dravecky (talk) 00:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds a little too much like "we have some stations not included in any geo templates, so let's just make one," and that worries me. JPG-GR (talk) 03:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why's it a problem? Every station is technically somewhere, and in this case, there's a decent number of stations targeting Roanoke Rapids and until I put it together, there was no recognition of it on Wikipedia. I'm just trying to get the areas I live in and near straightened up a little bit. TripEricson (talk) 04:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Trip, you are doing just fine. Everything worries JPG. I will work on the rest of those stations today. (got caught up playing with the new "toys") - NeutralHomer T:C 16:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if NH gives it his blessing, it'll survive, since it's in his area of stations that he owns. JPG-GR (talk) 19:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alright you two, I know Christmas is technically over but Santa has already started his list for next year. Be nice.--Rtphokie (talk) 19:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
/sighs/ - NeutralHomer T:C 19:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas (or the winter holiday of your choice)

It's so hard to shop for an entire WikiProject so this Christmas I decided to take {{US Virgin Islands Radio}} which had one lonely blue link in a field of red and make it my holiday project. Now that template is overhauled, every station has a useful stub/start article complete with infobox and (where available) a station logo, and we're one step closer to galactic domination. Or, um, at least one step closer to having the radio stations of the US Territories all blue-linked. (You're next, Puerto Rico!) Here's hoping your holiday is a safe and happy one. - Dravecky (talk) 15:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To you as well Dravecky :) - NeutralHomer T:C 15:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, if and when you get to Puerto Rico, use a bit of caution — just by comparing List of radio stations in U.S. Territories to the PR stub category, I caught at least a dozen redlinks for which we already had articles at variant titles. I can't speak to how complete the PR template is at present, but the list still contains a lot of redlinks — although some may be translators which should just exist as redirects, and others may still be variant titles for articles that we already have. Bearcat (talk) 10:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

translator template

I remember seeing some sort of a template for listing translators for a station but it's not in Category:Radio templates. Anyone know the template I'm talking about?--Rtphokie (talk) 18:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{RadioTranslators}}? JPG-GR (talk) 19:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! That's the one. I see you categorized it too, thanks.--Rtphokie (talk) 13:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could I ask for somebody who knows how to code templates (I don't) to pass me a revised copy of this template with the FCC column stripped out, so that it can also be used on Canadian radio stations? For Canadian use, {{RadioRebroadcasters}} would be the most appropriate title. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 09:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. JPG-GR (talk) 00:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks much. Bearcat (talk) 04:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radio lists

Could I potentially ask for some help converting the various lists of Canadian radio stations to the same table format that's now in use on the American radio lists? I'm finding it an exceedingly tedious job to do all by myself, to the point where I simply can't stand to convert more than five or six stations per day anymore (at which rate it'll take about three weeks just to finish List of radio stations in Ontario alone). For what it's worth, Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia are the really horrible, time-and-soul-sucking "I'M AT N AND STILL HAVE 90 COMMUNITIES OF LICENSE TO GO?!?!?" ones that are most daunting my will to live — Prince Edward Island is already done, and the other nine lists could all be done start-to-finish in 20 minutes to an hour each if I had any patience left. Bearcat (talk) 09:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I did the state lists, I was using the FCC database and dumping all the info into the tables. If Canada has a similar database, I could probably adapt it. JPG-GR (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The primary broadcast database for Canadian stations, Industry Canada's Spectrum Direct, isn't structured the same way as the FCC's (for example, you can't do a geographic search by city of license, but only by the latitude and longitude coordinates of the transmitter, and searches don't produce a linkable URL that can be used for anything comparable to the {{FMQ}} template), so I don't know if it lends itself to the same approach. We compiled the lists primarily by doing a dump from RadioStationWorld and then adjusting for any known changes or inaccuracies. So, in practice, reformatting the lists primarily involves cutting and pasting the existing list line by line, which is why it's such a tedious job for one person. Bearcat (talk) 04:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Back when I looked into incorporating Canada into my own database, I discovered that the CRTC does not maintain a publicly available list of stations which they license, which is quite an amazing situation for such a progressive nation. To get a complete list, you have to purchase it from a third party supplier, so I dropped Canada from my directory.StreamingRadioGuide (talk) 17:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Part of the problem is that the CRTC doesn't actually regulate the technical aspects of Canadian broadcasting; it's only responsible for ownership and content regulations. Industry Canada is actually responsible for things like assigning call signs, determining which frequencies can be used in which locations, determining where transmitters can and can't be located, etc., so a database anything like the FCC's would require coordination across multiple bodies. Bearcat (talk) 06:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still looking for help getting these converted. Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories and Nunavut are done, which leaves British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador and Yukon. Bearcat (talk) 06:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US stations with 'D' prepended to callsign

I've noticed a couple of stations in the FCC database who's callsign history includes a prepending of 'D' to the callsign. What does this mean? Example: KAGB --Rtphokie (talk) 17:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means at one time the license was Deleted but the owner was able to do whatever that had to do to get it back. There are a few like that. - NeutralHomer T:C 17:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. Is this just a paperwork thing or is this an indication that the station went off the air for that period of time?--Rtphokie (talk) 18:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes it is a little of both. WTHU in Thurmont, Maryland lost their license for 3 days and while it was technically deleted, they were allowed to continue broadcasting. WZFM in Narrows, Virginia, on the other hand, had their license deleted and were silent for that time (around 2 months). Both stations are back on the air. - NeutralHomer T:C 18:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know thanks.--Rtphokie (talk) 18:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem :) - NeutralHomer T:C 18:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The FCC lines to keep data about old stations around, particularly those which might be subject to legal action (if the commission actually revokes a license, legal action nearly always follows), but also for international coordination reasons. (Stations which cease to exist domestically are not necessarily denotified internationally.) And like other independent agencies, non-emergency decisions of the FCC not final until some time after they are published, to give interested parties time to prepare an appeal. 121a0012 (talk) 05:33, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UK Local Radio Stations under danger from WP:CSD#A7

I have noticed that a number of local radio stations were removed from the list of UK radio stations after they were deleted. I checked one (a nearby local station) called Rother FM and I noticed that the article was deleted under speedy deletion criteria A7, whereas other stations with simliar notability and coverage (ie. Trax FM, Lincs FM, Dearne FM and even greater coverage stations such as Hallam FM and BBC Radio Sheffield are untouched. I fear that now all the local radio articles could be under threat of being speedily deleted under A7, after all, if a number of stations similar to the ones which still exist are being deleted, surely the rest are now under threat (Wikipedia being neutral and all that)? ----tgheretford (talk) 13:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they are licensed and meet the guidelines of this project, they should not be speedy deleted. I suspect that most of the administrators in this project would be willing to undelete those stations. I don't believe that a speedy needs a full deletion review to be undeleted. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Vegaswikian is correct that a licensed radio station which meets the criteria set out by this project should not be speedied. I've reverted this one. I also did a quick random scan of a few of the other deleted UK radio articles, and would note that many of them were actually speedied months ago and just weren't actually removed from List of radio stations in the United Kingdom until today. I suspect there's going to need to be a coordinated administrator project to review these deletions — I'm willing to help out with it, but I'm not going to revert all of them by myself. Bearcat (talk) 22:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Auto archiving

Unless someone expresses a problem, I'll be setting this talk page u[ for auto archiving. I'll probably do it for discussions over 60 days old and have yearly archives. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be appreciated--Rtphokie (talk) 22:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated. JPG-GR (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK the bot ran and created a batch in the 2007 archive. I repackaged /archives, /Archive 2, /Archive 3 and /Archive 4 into /Archive 2005, /Archive 2006 and /Archive 2007. I'll delete the old ones in a few days. I updated the archive box to point to the new archives. Vegaswikian (talk) 08:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image callout

So as you all know, we only have a couple weeks left to be image compliant. At User:East718/DFUI/Logos we've created a list of all logos lacking full fair-use rationales (read article backlinks). I see a lot of them are radio station logos. Could this project pitch in and help with the backlog? MBisanz talk 03:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

renaming Tri-Cities Radio Template

I'd like to get some thoughts on renameing {{Tri-Cities Radio}} If you have opinions, please add them here: Template talk:Tri-Cities Radio

FM station data template

Anyone know anything about {{FM station data}}? It doesn't seem necessary to me and it's coloring and overall design doesn't fit very well.--Rtphokie (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, but there's a similar {{AM station data}} that I've quietly removed from the one article in which I encountered it. It's a nice idea in need of much better execution. - Dravecky (talk) 07:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, there are over 200 articles that use these templates. I started reverting them to use the existing FCC, Radio Locater, and Arbitron templates instead but even with AWB it's a fairly manual process (I'm no C# coder). I gave up and instead updated {{FM station data}} and {{AM station data}} to appear as bulleted lists instead of the brown box Also added a note on these teamplate's talk pages with an invitation to discuss any changes here. Upon further reflection I agree it's a nice idea that could save some keystrokes but it needs more work before rolling it out on hundreds of pages.--Rtphokie (talk) 15:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For CDBS, at least, you really want to do the search by FIN rather than by callsign. 121a0012 (talk) 19:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Market templates with links to disambiguation pages

Hi. While cleaning up items on Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/from templates, I noticed that several of the templates listed there (Template:Houston Radio for example) fall under the range of WikiProject Radio Stations and thought that handling of the disambig of these might be done more efficiently (and more accurately) by members of this project. Just thought I would bring it to your attention and see if this task was of interest for the project's to-do list. Best wishes. -Gwguffey (talk) 19:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's certainly something we could be tackling. I just finished cleaning up the Houston template and I'll put the others on my to-do list. Of course, the more folks that care to jump in and fix these, the merrier. - Dravecky (talk) 20:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've made a note on the list's talk page they you guys are going to swing by. I'll move on to other topics. Happy Editing. -Gwguffey (talk) 02:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've just spent all evening fixing about 100 of these templates and my eyes are starting to cross. I made it about halfway through that list and by my count there are only about 70 left to do. (Start at #631 (Template:Trenton Radio) if you jump in.) Oh, and {{Bridgeport Radio}} got skipped by mistake. So make that 71 to do. It's 4am here and I'm headed to sleep. - Dravecky (talk) 10:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the list, please mark out what has been completed:

  1. Template:Alaska Panhandle Radio
  2. Template:Ann Arbor Radio
  3. Template:Appleton-Oshkosh Radio
  4. Template:BBC Radio 1
  5. Template:Bloomington IL Radio
  6. Template:Bowling Green Radio
  7. Template:Bridgeport Radio
  8. Template:Brunswick Radio
  9. Template:Calexico Radio
  10. Template:Cedar Rapids Radio}
  11. Template:Classic Rock Radio Stations in Minnesota
  12. Template:Columbus-Starkville-West Point Radio
  13. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Arkansas
  14. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Florida
  15. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Idaho
  16. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Mississippi
  17. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Montana
  18. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Oklahoma
  19. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in South Carolina
  20. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Tennessee
  21. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Utah
  22. Template:Contemporary Hit Radio Stations in Washington
  23. Template:Dance Radio stations
  24. Template:Decatur Radio
  25. Template:Dubuque Radio
  26. Template:Eau Claire Radio
  27. Template:Elmira-Corning Radio
  28. Template:Florida Keys Radio
  29. Template:Ft. Walton Beach Radio
  30. Template:Hastings Radio
  31. Template:Jackson TN Radio
  32. Template:Joplin Radio
  33. Template:Juneau Radio
  34. Template:Kingston Radio
  35. Template:Knoxville Radio
  36. Template:LaSalle-Peru Radio
  37. Template:La Crosse Radio
  38. Template:Lake Ponchartrain Radio
  39. Template:Las Cruces Radio
  40. Template:Laughlin Radio
  41. Template:Lebanon-Rutland-White River Junction Radio
  42. Template:Marion-Carbondale (Southern IL) Radio
  43. Template:Maui Radio
  44. Template:Meridian Radio
  45. Template:New Haven Radio
  46. Template:North Platte Radio
  47. Template:Northern Washington Radio
  48. Template:Odessa-Midland Radio
  49. Template:Ohio college radio
  50. Template:Olean Radio
  51. Template:Owensboro Radio
  52. Template:Panama City Radio
  53. Template:Portsmouth Radio
  54. Template:Public Radio International
  55. Template:Quad Cities Radio
  56. Template:Rapid City Radio
  57. Template:Rockford Radio
  58. Template:Salina-Manhattan Radio
  59. Template:Shreveport Radio
  60. Template:Sioux City Radio
  61. Template:South Central Alaska Radio
  62. Template:Southside VA Radio
  63. Template:Sunbury-Selinsgrove-Lewisburg Radio
  64. Template:Terre Haute Radio
  65. Template:Topeka Radio
  66. Template:Trenton Radio
  67. Template:Waterloo-Cedar Falls Radio
  68. Template:Watertown SD Radio
  69. Template:Yakima Radio

--Rtphokie (talk) 16:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of the work that you guys did on this. -Gwguffey (talk) 03:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-FM1 ?

Time for another question for one of the experts here. What does the -FM1 extension to a callsign mean? The only one I've come across is: WMEX-FM1. Is it a typo or does this mean something special? I was surprised to see a 16 watt station designated class D (wouldn't that be LP)?--Rtphokie (talk) 01:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I first encountered this at WGZB-FM and learned that it's how the FCC designates a station's on-channel broadcast translator. - Dravecky (talk) 01:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just moved the page back to WMEX, the actual call sign of the station. The -FM1 and -FM2 extensions mean that it is a booster station, which broadcasts the same signal on the same frequency - usually to extend the coverage area. That's why the ERP was so low. What I find strange about this station is that both booster transmitters are located within the range of the parent transmitter, and do not seem to provide any additional coverage. --Scott Alter 02:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Booster stations are like translator stations, just on the same frequency as their parent. The purpose of them is to fill in the dead area, I don't know how fashionable they are these days, usually it's too difficult to run them (they can't interfer with the parent signal, so most owners go the translator route, they can't send the signal via internet or anything but a highly direction antenna with a radio tuned to the frequency). I don't even think the WMEX boosters are on the air. Mr mark taylor (talk) 03:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Boosters must be within the station's theoretical protected contour, by law. Sometimes, particularly in mountainous terrain, the theoretical contour encompasses populated areas which are well outside of the actual contour. In this case, a booster may be used. For example, KHYZ in Mountain Pass, California, was built where it was specifically to allow for a 2.5-kW booster on Black Mountain in Henderson, Nevada, from which it will serve as a Las Vegas station. If you'd prefer an example of something that already exists, KOAS in Dolan Springs, Arizona exists only to serve a booster, KOAS-FM1, on the Stratosphere. Similarly, numerous stations in the Salt Lake City market have full class-C facilities on Humpy Peak, which in actuality serves no populated places whatsoever, but which allows the stations to operate high-power boosters up and down the Salt Lake valley. WRKI in Brookfield, Connecticut has boosters on the fringes of its service area—no terrain blockage required—in Bridgeport and Norwalk. 121a0012 (talk) 04:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As far as the WMEX boosters go, I know both of them have been on the air in the past (I know the station's owner, Dennis Jackson). The Rochester booster is located on the roof of the building in downtown Rochester where the studios are located, and was off the air for a while so that interference issues could be resolved. 121a0012 (talk) 04:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and note also that boosters are entirely distinct from translators, at least in a regulatory sense. 121a0012 (talk) 04:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting stuff, thanks for the information.--Rtphokie (talk) 14:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WNTK

Can an admin thats part of this project swap WNTK and WNTK-FM? WNTK should redirect to WNTK-FM (not the other way around), that's the official call letters and I (stupidly) redirected WNTK-FM to WNTK before I researched and discovered the actual call letters (It's an -FM because the current WCNL was WNTK until last year). Mr mark taylor (talk) 14:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List it at WP:RM in the Uncontroversial section. I'm not aware of any (active) admins who are part of WP:WPRS. JPG-GR (talk) 18:21, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Moved. Can someone cleanup the double redirects? Thanks. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's got it. - Dravecky (talk) 03:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an active admin. Maybe the members list on the front page should include some kind of notation so that project members know who they can approach if they need admin help. Bearcat (talk) 21:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Air Force Academy radio station

I'm not finding an FCC record for KAFA-FM though the article claims they broadcast on 97.7. Is this station still broadcasting or is it a case of some unlicensed, low power, campus only broadcast. Are the rules different because it's technically a military station?--Rtphokie (talk) 13:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like another low power, campus only operation...I have no idea if it's on but radio-locator, fccinfo.com and the FCC database have no idea it exists, however if you go here and click on query and enter the call letters, KAFA are calls assigned to the US Government, what this exactly means, I have no idea. Mr mark taylor (talk) 15:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it's like KPSU (Portland) which is a branding for leased time on another station unlike the licensed college station KPSU (FM). - Dravecky (talk) 02:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:WJDV2007.jpg

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:WJDV2007.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

The uploader has retired from Wikipedia.--Rockfang (talk) 04:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the tag as the image description clearly states that the image was taken from the station's website. I added a link to that website[2] to the description. - Dravecky (talk) 05:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The tag was put back on because the FUR didn't list the article I guess. I used the FUR template and included the disputed info. The image shouldn't be retagged again, I did all my uploads the same way and that usually takes care of it. RobDe68 (talk) 03:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Premiere Radio vs. Premier Radio

When referring to Premiere Radio Networks (syndicator of Rush Limbaugh, Jim Rome, Bob and Tom, and other shows) in station articles, be careful to link to Premiere Radio Networks (the U.S. based, Clear Channel subsidiary) not Premier Radio, the UK based Christian radio network.--Rtphokie (talk) 13:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Premier Radio is a dab so this is not an issue. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I just created those DABs and fixed the 111 articles that were referring to the UK based network that were intended to point to the US based one. It's always better to link to the correct article rather than a DAB. Just a heads up. --Rtphokie (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. radio market info

Where (if anywhere) is the market info on the various market templates and pages like List of radio stations in California by market area based on? Arbitron's website has information about how a particular market area is defined (looks like it's expressed by county) but I cant find a listing of the stations included in a particular market on Arbitron's website.

The closest thing I've found to that information is on Radio and Record website. For example a listing of market #120. Is that a complete listing of stations in the market? Is there a better source of information?

Ultimately I'd like to cleanup the market templates as there are probably some stations in these templates that aren't really part of the market (distant or fringe stations).

Proposal: once we have some consensus on what the best source of market data is, add a market column with that information to all the List of radio stations in state pages and treat these lists as canon (i.e. the place that gets updated first when the basics like formats, callsigns, frequency, market, etc. changes occur). Probably should also consider merging pages like List of radio stations in California by market area and List of radio stations in the Victor Valley into the a page like List of radio stations in California.

Thoughts?--Rtphokie (talk) 13:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of the List of radio stations in STATE by market have been removed (in fact, at last check, California is the last one left, as an editor expressed some interest in working on it).
Long story short - it is impossible to place every station in one market and one market only, as many don't belong to any of the magic 302 and many reach many markets. In other words, there is no reasonable way to add a market column to List of radio stations in STATE, hence why it was excluded in the redesign.
As for the individual market templates... yeah, that's another battle entirely. JPG-GR (talk) 17:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think there was a debate some time ago about splitting the template into in market stations heard and out of market stations heard. I can think of several stations you could put in 6 or 7 market templates, and on the flipside I can think of several stations that lie far enough outside the primary market area that don't make it in to the "metro" as they say (the primary county/counties of the market) Mr mark taylor (talk) 19:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Radio_Stations&oldid=193327008"