![]() | WTRF-TV has been listed as one of the
Media and drama good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: December 23, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from WTRF-TV appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 7 January 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Someone keeps reverting the changes that are being made in the "News and Programming" section on the basis that the edits are based on "unreliable sources". The revisions in question are found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=WTRF-TV&diff=1021302712&oldid=1021302584
The problem here is that there have been sources. At least one is Titan TV, which can be used as a source for the other information listed that the reverter is saying is based on an unreliable source.
Would also like to know what the person who is rejecting these changes expects as a reliable source for this information. Other TV station pages here on Wiki have used Titan TV as a source for listing the programs on a channel. Because this station houses four subchannels and has three network affiliations, one source can catch the majority of what the article would cite. This is the same source that is used on several other station pages, including KDKA-TV and WOIO-TV. The information that is listed on the purposed edit is also available on those and other station pages without many, if any, sources and is allowed to remain like that. I did notice that the "citation needed" tag was not enough for one of the shows that WTRF produced in the early 90's. That got completely erased thanks to whoever made the reversions without even a second look or even an effort to locate sources on their own, which was even suggested. There are far better ways to ask for sources than to just silently and blindly revert something.
Even worse, a source that listed that WTRF acquired the Ohio Lottery programming (including Cash Explosion) sourced THE VERY PAGE FROM THE OHIO LOTTERY SITE STATING THIS CHANGE! What other source does this person need to be convinced that this information belongs on this page? You can't get any more reliable than THE PEOPLE THAT MADE IT HAPPEN! What is this person looking at that makes the producers of the actual show in question telling you that the show moved to a new station isn't reliable enough? If you count the Titan TV page, that would make it TWO SOURCES THAT ONE COULD GO TO FOR CONFIRMATION OF THIS FACT! Again, what is this person looking for that would be enough for them to agree that this is sufficient enough?
In fact, the suspicion is that whoever is watching the page is getting a RedWarn (it shows that person got one on the History tab), just clicked "revert" without even inspecting the changes to make sure, and reverting them back to the SORELY outdated version we keep seeing. I don't think I've seen Decision Makers be a thing on ANY of the stations Nexstar got from WVMH in YEARS, yet whoever is reverting changes is INSISTING that this info is current and should remain on the page. This is insane. The only other thing I can think of as a reason is that whoever is watching the page REALLY hates this station and doesn't want anyone giving it a more NPOV, which means that someone at Wikipedia needs to look into it, because this station's page won't ever get updated as long as that person continues to blindly revert any update with that excuse when they would see the sources would be satisfactory, and others could at least attempt to add other sources to satisfy this user.
Again, there are a LOT better ways to address the sources situation than this currently is. Put a tag asking for additional sources, allow editors the chance to provide them! SOMETHING! This shouldn't be that much of a battle to add information to this page, especially when one of the pieces of info is sourced from the very site that belongs to the very people that would sign off on making such a decision. Darkpower ( talk) 07:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
"WTRF will be starting a new Fox affiliate due to the demise of the FoxNet cable channel in September, 2006. It is not clear if this will be cable-only or also available via WTRF-DT 32. This is per users4.ev1.net/~chipk/CW.html/."
Can someone please explain this in English? I got something about TRF being some sort of FOX affiliate, but after that the words failed to make any bit of sense. I've never heard of the "FoxNet" cable channel in Wheeling. Maybe it was the last sentence that lost me. Maybe I'm just in need of sleep or something.
With the new digital broadcasting (replacing the 50-year-old analog broadcasting), TV stations can broadcast more than one signal. WTOV is using it's second "channel" as a full-time weather channel. WTRF is using it's second as a FOX affiation. Most of the Prime-Time programming found on FOX53 from Pittsburgh can also be found on "FOX Ohio Valley". TV sets with digital tuners can receive this on channel 7-2. WTRF's regular programming can be found in a digital format on channel 7-1.
Does that clear things up?
DRA@1st.net
WTRF has experienced reporters who know the Ohio Valley. Jerry Echemann, D.K. Wright and Dave Elias know the area and understand how to present news to the Ohio Valley. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.219.222.3 (
talk) 02:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Didn't WTRF have a secondary ABC affiliation well into the 1980s? I remember for special events (Indy 500, for example), they would carry the ABC feed instead of the CBS feed? The date in the article of 1980 seems too early. Does anybody have a more exact date of when they completely dropped ABC as a secondary affiliate? Dmine45 ( talk) 19:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I think this had something to do with WVTX-CD no longer being on air and thus, WTRF had to do something to get MyNet in HD from 420p like it was on their subchannel. Problem is, it's not just too much info, but the info that's there is way to hard to make out what was even said. It's terribly hard to follow what is even being said. Common people won't even know what a spectrum even IS, but instead of explaining that or cross linking to something that will give more info, the section instead info dumps to the point where it becomes hard to follow. Points are suddenly abandoned mid sentence to explain what something is that can be explained elsewhere or cross linked to another article, and then the previous point is suddenly picked back up again as if we were able to follow along. I would fix it but I'm not even sure what the author was trying to get across, even when I have a general idea of what the subject is about. WVTX-CD, after the failed attempt to make a third station in the market out if it, became a secondary feed for WTRF's ABC subchannel until WTVX ceased operation. Outside of that, I don't understand what was being said. Darkpower ( talk) 22:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose ( talk · contribs) 17:16, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sources
History
News operation
Subchannels
Infobox and lead
Only a couple of minor questions and points, Sammi Brie. thanks for your work on the article. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 18:52, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
@ BennyOnTheLoose: Done. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:01, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Bruxton (
talk) 18:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie ( talk). Self-nominated at 18:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
![]() | WTRF-TV has been listed as one of the
Media and drama good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: December 23, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from WTRF-TV appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 7 January 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Someone keeps reverting the changes that are being made in the "News and Programming" section on the basis that the edits are based on "unreliable sources". The revisions in question are found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=WTRF-TV&diff=1021302712&oldid=1021302584
The problem here is that there have been sources. At least one is Titan TV, which can be used as a source for the other information listed that the reverter is saying is based on an unreliable source.
Would also like to know what the person who is rejecting these changes expects as a reliable source for this information. Other TV station pages here on Wiki have used Titan TV as a source for listing the programs on a channel. Because this station houses four subchannels and has three network affiliations, one source can catch the majority of what the article would cite. This is the same source that is used on several other station pages, including KDKA-TV and WOIO-TV. The information that is listed on the purposed edit is also available on those and other station pages without many, if any, sources and is allowed to remain like that. I did notice that the "citation needed" tag was not enough for one of the shows that WTRF produced in the early 90's. That got completely erased thanks to whoever made the reversions without even a second look or even an effort to locate sources on their own, which was even suggested. There are far better ways to ask for sources than to just silently and blindly revert something.
Even worse, a source that listed that WTRF acquired the Ohio Lottery programming (including Cash Explosion) sourced THE VERY PAGE FROM THE OHIO LOTTERY SITE STATING THIS CHANGE! What other source does this person need to be convinced that this information belongs on this page? You can't get any more reliable than THE PEOPLE THAT MADE IT HAPPEN! What is this person looking at that makes the producers of the actual show in question telling you that the show moved to a new station isn't reliable enough? If you count the Titan TV page, that would make it TWO SOURCES THAT ONE COULD GO TO FOR CONFIRMATION OF THIS FACT! Again, what is this person looking for that would be enough for them to agree that this is sufficient enough?
In fact, the suspicion is that whoever is watching the page is getting a RedWarn (it shows that person got one on the History tab), just clicked "revert" without even inspecting the changes to make sure, and reverting them back to the SORELY outdated version we keep seeing. I don't think I've seen Decision Makers be a thing on ANY of the stations Nexstar got from WVMH in YEARS, yet whoever is reverting changes is INSISTING that this info is current and should remain on the page. This is insane. The only other thing I can think of as a reason is that whoever is watching the page REALLY hates this station and doesn't want anyone giving it a more NPOV, which means that someone at Wikipedia needs to look into it, because this station's page won't ever get updated as long as that person continues to blindly revert any update with that excuse when they would see the sources would be satisfactory, and others could at least attempt to add other sources to satisfy this user.
Again, there are a LOT better ways to address the sources situation than this currently is. Put a tag asking for additional sources, allow editors the chance to provide them! SOMETHING! This shouldn't be that much of a battle to add information to this page, especially when one of the pieces of info is sourced from the very site that belongs to the very people that would sign off on making such a decision. Darkpower ( talk) 07:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
"WTRF will be starting a new Fox affiliate due to the demise of the FoxNet cable channel in September, 2006. It is not clear if this will be cable-only or also available via WTRF-DT 32. This is per users4.ev1.net/~chipk/CW.html/."
Can someone please explain this in English? I got something about TRF being some sort of FOX affiliate, but after that the words failed to make any bit of sense. I've never heard of the "FoxNet" cable channel in Wheeling. Maybe it was the last sentence that lost me. Maybe I'm just in need of sleep or something.
With the new digital broadcasting (replacing the 50-year-old analog broadcasting), TV stations can broadcast more than one signal. WTOV is using it's second "channel" as a full-time weather channel. WTRF is using it's second as a FOX affiation. Most of the Prime-Time programming found on FOX53 from Pittsburgh can also be found on "FOX Ohio Valley". TV sets with digital tuners can receive this on channel 7-2. WTRF's regular programming can be found in a digital format on channel 7-1.
Does that clear things up?
DRA@1st.net
WTRF has experienced reporters who know the Ohio Valley. Jerry Echemann, D.K. Wright and Dave Elias know the area and understand how to present news to the Ohio Valley. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.219.222.3 (
talk) 02:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Didn't WTRF have a secondary ABC affiliation well into the 1980s? I remember for special events (Indy 500, for example), they would carry the ABC feed instead of the CBS feed? The date in the article of 1980 seems too early. Does anybody have a more exact date of when they completely dropped ABC as a secondary affiliate? Dmine45 ( talk) 19:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I think this had something to do with WVTX-CD no longer being on air and thus, WTRF had to do something to get MyNet in HD from 420p like it was on their subchannel. Problem is, it's not just too much info, but the info that's there is way to hard to make out what was even said. It's terribly hard to follow what is even being said. Common people won't even know what a spectrum even IS, but instead of explaining that or cross linking to something that will give more info, the section instead info dumps to the point where it becomes hard to follow. Points are suddenly abandoned mid sentence to explain what something is that can be explained elsewhere or cross linked to another article, and then the previous point is suddenly picked back up again as if we were able to follow along. I would fix it but I'm not even sure what the author was trying to get across, even when I have a general idea of what the subject is about. WVTX-CD, after the failed attempt to make a third station in the market out if it, became a secondary feed for WTRF's ABC subchannel until WTVX ceased operation. Outside of that, I don't understand what was being said. Darkpower ( talk) 22:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose ( talk · contribs) 17:16, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sources
History
News operation
Subchannels
Infobox and lead
Only a couple of minor questions and points, Sammi Brie. thanks for your work on the article. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 18:52, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
@ BennyOnTheLoose: Done. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:01, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Bruxton (
talk) 18:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie ( talk). Self-nominated at 18:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |