Talk:WJW (TV) - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aoidh (talk | contribs) at 04:16, 30 September 2014 (→Concerning schedules: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 04:16, 30 September 2014 by Aoidh (talk | contribs) (→Concerning schedules: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Cleveland High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Cleveland, the scope of which includes Cleveland and the Greater Cleveland Area. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.ClevelandWikipedia:WikiProject ClevelandTemplate:WikiProject ClevelandCleveland
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: Television / Ohio Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Low-importance).

{{WikiProject Television|class=C|television-stations=yes|television-stations-importance=}}

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Baseball Low‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I removed this old info-box and replaced it with the template version. I'm putting this here as some information was lost in the transition. --Andy Janata 4 July 2005 05:27 (UTC)

WJW (FOX)

Slogan: N/A
Cleveland, Ohio
Channel 8 Digital channel 31
Owner	Fox Television Stations
Founded	December 12, 1949 on Channel 9
Signal Radius	Cleveland, Ohio
Callsign Meaning	unknown
Former Callsigns	'WXEL, WJW, WJKW
Former Affiliations	DuMont, CBS
Channel position switch:	9 to 8 on December 10, 1953
Affiliation Change from CBS to Fox	September 3, 1994
Address	5800 South Marginal Road Cleveland, Ohio, 44103
Website:	www.fox8cleveland.com

I've incorporated some of the lost information into the main body text. - 203.218.136.143, July 5, 2005

Edit History

When GusGus moved the page to WJW-TV, and Hinto reverted that, we lost the edit history on WJW -- it is still attached to WJW-TV. Could we perhaps delete WJW and move WJW-TV back as to have easy access to the edit history again? --Andy Janata 19:29, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm new to the moving process. I supposed I should've RfD'd WJW myself first. - Hinto 05:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Jim Hale

Anybody know whatever happened to Jim Hale? I've seen him in some Youtube clips from the 70s.

Mjlarochelle (talk) 01:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Non-free images

Galleries of purely decorative non-free images are removed from articles where there is no critical commentary on the images themselves, which in this case there is not. The relevant policies are;

WP:NFCC#3a - "Multiple items are not used if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary."
WP:NFCC#8 - "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic"
WP:LOGOS - "Generally, logos should be used only when the logo is reasonably familiar (or when the logo itself is of interest for design or artistic reasons)."

BKNFCC 07:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with your contention that the images are purely decorative. They are not; they are intended to represent the evolution of the television station's brand over the years.

RE:WP:NFCC#3a - It is not possible to use only one item if the purpose is to display historical evolution of the station's brand over the years, which is exactly the purpose of the gallery. One item does not suffice.
RE:WP:NFCC#8 - This point is under dispute, as it is so subjective, it can be taken in any way any editor sees fit. In fact, one of the stated abuses in the discussion is that it was being used as a pretext to remove all non-free images from Misplaced Pages. The sticking point, naturally, is the word "significantly". Still, it looks as if one consensus is that images are not to be used if its use damages in any way the copyright owner's ability to benefit from the image. These are historical images no longer in use; there is no danger to the original copyright holder that his ability to profit from the image would be damaged by its use here.
RE:WP:LOGOS - This quotation is taken out of context. The full context of the guideline is: "Avoid using a logo in any way that creates an impression that the purpose of its inclusion is to promote something. Generally, logos should be used only when the logo is reasonably familiar (or when the logo itself is of interest for design or artistic reasons)." The guideline cited was put in place to avoid promotional use. The use of the questioned logos in this article are not for such purpose.

Finally, to be clear, you are citing guidelines, not policy, and one of the hallmarks of the guideline is that there is room for a common-sense interpretation. Given the purpose of the logo galleries, I believe that common sense allows for them. As such, I am restoring the images. dhett 17:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

And I am removing them again, pointing out that WP:NFCC is policy, not a guideline. You are possibly confusing it with WP:NFC. Even without NFCC, the logos aren't even discussed in the text (all the article says is "WXEL/WJW-TV (WJKW-TV) has used many logos throughout its history") which means they're clearly decorative. BKNFCC 22:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Many of these fonts are also HISTORY, and they have a STORY. They should be look at on a case-by-case basis, not deleted wholesale. In my opinion, if you had your way, there wouldn't be ang graphics AT ALL, not only on Misplaced Pages, but also on the internet as a whole, In fact, you would probably think that only one font should be used, and that the internet woul be limited to post-graduate topics. Sorry, but I am being BOLD by saying what I think. And as Dhett mentioned here, Misplaced Pages is a consensus "society", not a totalitarian regime. -- azumanga (talk) 04:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

It also has rules, which we call policies. And you are not being bold, you are being incivil as well. BKNFCC 06:46, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

These historical logos do not violate policy (which I mistakenly referred to as guidelines before). There is no policy limiting the number of non-free images that an article can use. There is no policy governing the use of historical logos, which do not endanger the benefits of copyright protection. I am in the process of adding commentary to the logos. dhett 07:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

You are correct that there is technically no limit to non-free images - but the policy is quite clear that it must be minimal use. However, you are incorrect about the logos not violating policy as the article originally stood - they were clearly decorative because there was no critical commentary. Whether the logos are historical are not is a moot point; if they're copyrighted, they're non-free. Nevertheless, your addition of commentary to them may fix that problem for some of the logos, so thank you. BKNFCC 09:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Notable on-air staff, former employees and titles/slogans

Adding unreferenced entries of former employees to lists containing BLP material

Hello, Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to the list of former employees in articles. Including this type of material in articles does not abide by current consensus and its inclusion is strongly discouraged in our policies and guidelines. The rationales are as follows:

WP:NOT tells us, Misplaced Pages is "not an indiscriminate collection of information." As that section describes, just because something is true, doesn't necessarily mean the info belongs in Misplaced Pages.
As per WP:V, we cannot include information in Misplaced Pages that is not verifiable and sourced.
WP:Source list 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.

If you look at articles about companies in general, you will not find mention of previous employees, except in those cases where the employee was particularly notable. Even then, the information is not presented just as a list of names, but is incorporated into the text itself (for example, when a company's article talks about the policies a previous CEO had, or when they mention the discovery/invention of a former engineer/researcher). If a preexisting article is already in the encyclopedia for the person you want to add to a list, it's generally regarded as sufficient to support their inclusion in list material in another article. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 22:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

WEWS-TV relevant discussion

Please see Talk:WEWS-TV#Staff for relevant discussion on how to handle information on past and present station personalities. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 22:08, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Notable on-air staff and titles/slogans

Hello, I have removed the staff and former staff that is/was not notable. In order for lists of people be included, they must meet the criteria listed at WP:LISTPEOPLE. This isn't the first station article this has been discussed on, and articles have been protected to prevent these additions, or the editors in question blocked when they persistently continue to reinsert inappropriate material. If a name is included in the article in this way, it has to show that it's relevant to the subject by meeting WP:LISTPEOPLE. Just because a station lists its employees doesn't mean Misplaced Pages needs to as well, and other station articles needing similar cleanup doesn't mean this one doesn't need to be cleaned up, because whenever it's actually discussed on a station article, the end result is the same; the names that don't meet WP:LISTPEOPLE are removed. Misplaced Pages is also not a directory. A list of previous discussions are listed below:

A current discussion is taking place here.

Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 00:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Concerning schedules

As discussed elsewhere (for example Talk:WZTV), unless reliable sources can be provided that show that a schedule or list of times and programming has relevance to the encyclopedic coverage of the station, they do not belong on the article. If reliable sources do not make note of the importance of such things, the article should not either. Sources mentioning in passing that news comes on at a certain time does not show that it is relevant. - Aoidh (talk) 04:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Categories: