Talk:KMIZ/GA1: Difference between revisions

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ixtal (talk · contribs) 01:36, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for

]

Table

here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b ( lists ): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism ): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have suitable captions ):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Comments

Lead

• It provided a full-time outlet for the ABC network, previously split between the market's two other major commercial stations. Does this "previously split" refer to the ABC network? Bit confused by the wording of this phrase.
  • ABC shows would have been aired by the other two stations in the market prior to KCBJ-TV coming on air, as there were only two stations to carry the main programs of the three networks. Not an uncommon arrangement historically in so-called "short" markets.
    • Would these stations divide the programming? As in station A would do Show 1 and 4 and station B would do 2 and 3? — ♠Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. ♠ 14:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Correct. The Television Factbook for 1970–71 shows KOMU as NBC/ABC and KRCG as CBS/ABC. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for the clarification. — ♠Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. ♠ 19:24, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• but the deal turned sour, and the prospective buyers sued for breach of contract. The comma here seems unnecessary to me.
  • WP:CINS. Two sentences connected by a ", and". Comments to here: Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Fair.Y

• I will now proceed with a source revision. I understand a number of GA reviewers don't do it, so I apologize for extending the wait! This is a fantastic article from what I've read. My most sincere apologies for taking longer when I said I'd finish revising it some days ago. — ♠Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. ♠ 14:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

• Couldn't find source 7 specifically mentioning the Jacksonville town 17mi SW, but I assume that is mentioned either elsewhere in the sources of the page or I missed it so is reasonable info to include regardless.
  • Ref invocation added to fix this.
• Can't find mention of the specific percentages increasing the rating from 3 to 12 in 1986, I assume this would be in the next page of the newspaper rather than 46.
  • Last paragraph of, you guessed it, the next page. I will always link the other pages which have to be separately clipped. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Rest of sources check out or I can't access. Altogether well-cited. I'll be passing the source reviews; the GA status doesn't really depend on the two minor things I mention above although you are free to fix them.— ♠Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. ♠ 15:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ixtal: Resolved the remaining issues. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous

• No copyright issues indicated by Copyvio tool.