This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following photo gallery was recently inserted into this article without any context (hence why it has been moved here). If someone can figure out a better way to integrate these pictures into the article (or nominate these images for deletion) go ahead. Pentawing Talk 06:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
There used to be a logo in the article that said it will be a new logo for WLS-TV in September. It looked similar to the KABC logo in Los Angees. What happened to it?
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)
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 - WxHalo( T/ C) 04:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
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)
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)
It would appear that people seem to be under the mistaken impression that information being available in a reliable source is the only criterion for inclusion in an encyclopaedia. The "incident" might deserve a few words under Trivia, but it most certainly is not a sufficiently major event for the large section that is included here. That's undue weight if ever I saw it. 90.203.45.168 ( talk) 19:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The below discussion was moved here from a User talk page for clarification of the BLP issue
End of enquoted, moved discussion
Thanks Jeff, I found a relevant section of BLP concerned with privacy of names of people involved in essentially a single event. Wjhonson ( talk) 15:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
This is all really dubious stuff. There are not just these sources but at least 50, (actually there are more, but they are in the google news archive) that mention him by name as the person involved, see here. Not using this free relevant informtaion because of "BLP concerns" (completely bogus) is nothing more noble that censorship. And wikipedia in not censored, just like the 100s of sources who used his name. Also, not that it matters, wet ducks backs spring to mind as regards "protecting" this man, something that you are openly advocating we dispose of all of policies V RS and free and uncensored. Lobojo ( talk) 16:19, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Jeff for a courteous reply. Regarding our BLP policy, I've provided a link, for interested parties, directly to a sub-section of that policy (see my above link) that appears to address this:
"Caution should be applied when naming individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed (such as in certain court cases), it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When evaluating the inclusion or removal of names, their publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories.
Editors should take particular care when considering whether inclusion of the names of private, living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of the privacy of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved persons without independent notability is correspondingly stronger.
In all cases where the redaction of names is considered, editors should be willing to discuss the issue on the article's talk page."
(Outdent) Lobojo, was this argument taken to BLP? If so can you provide a link to that sub-section? Thanks. Wjhonson ( talk) 21:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
The Wikipedia Manual of Style on heading ( WP:HEAD) says that:
not:
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:
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)
Hi. As long as its ok with you, I am going to restore the material that was deleted on the Chicago stations and will also tag the section as unreferenced. This gives me and other editors a chance to locate sources and make some editorial decisions rather than having almost the entire list deleted as unreferenced and apparently non-notable. Thanks NoSuchThing85 (talk) 20:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NoSuchThing85 ( talk • contribs)
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:
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following photo gallery was recently inserted into this article without any context (hence why it has been moved here). If someone can figure out a better way to integrate these pictures into the article (or nominate these images for deletion) go ahead. Pentawing Talk 06:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
There used to be a logo in the article that said it will be a new logo for WLS-TV in September. It looked similar to the KABC logo in Los Angees. What happened to it?
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)
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 - WxHalo( T/ C) 04:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
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)
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)
It would appear that people seem to be under the mistaken impression that information being available in a reliable source is the only criterion for inclusion in an encyclopaedia. The "incident" might deserve a few words under Trivia, but it most certainly is not a sufficiently major event for the large section that is included here. That's undue weight if ever I saw it. 90.203.45.168 ( talk) 19:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
The below discussion was moved here from a User talk page for clarification of the BLP issue
End of enquoted, moved discussion
Thanks Jeff, I found a relevant section of BLP concerned with privacy of names of people involved in essentially a single event. Wjhonson ( talk) 15:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
This is all really dubious stuff. There are not just these sources but at least 50, (actually there are more, but they are in the google news archive) that mention him by name as the person involved, see here. Not using this free relevant informtaion because of "BLP concerns" (completely bogus) is nothing more noble that censorship. And wikipedia in not censored, just like the 100s of sources who used his name. Also, not that it matters, wet ducks backs spring to mind as regards "protecting" this man, something that you are openly advocating we dispose of all of policies V RS and free and uncensored. Lobojo ( talk) 16:19, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Jeff for a courteous reply. Regarding our BLP policy, I've provided a link, for interested parties, directly to a sub-section of that policy (see my above link) that appears to address this:
"Caution should be applied when naming individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed (such as in certain court cases), it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When evaluating the inclusion or removal of names, their publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories.
Editors should take particular care when considering whether inclusion of the names of private, living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of the privacy of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved persons without independent notability is correspondingly stronger.
In all cases where the redaction of names is considered, editors should be willing to discuss the issue on the article's talk page."
(Outdent) Lobojo, was this argument taken to BLP? If so can you provide a link to that sub-section? Thanks. Wjhonson ( talk) 21:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
The Wikipedia Manual of Style on heading ( WP:HEAD) says that:
not:
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:
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)
Hi. As long as its ok with you, I am going to restore the material that was deleted on the Chicago stations and will also tag the section as unreferenced. This gives me and other editors a chance to locate sources and make some editorial decisions rather than having almost the entire list deleted as unreferenced and apparently non-notable. Thanks NoSuchThing85 (talk) 20:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NoSuchThing85 ( talk • contribs)
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:
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)