User talk:Stereorock

WNYC Hello. Please see WNYC talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Formulairis990 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the wnyc talk page Formulairis990 (talk) 01:40, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the wnyc talk pag Formulairis990 (talk) 21:58, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to point out the introductory text to that list – "The following is a list of the FCC-licensed radio stations...". That's the same on every one of those state lists, and the standard has always been that we don't include any station until they've been issued their license to cover. That's true regardless of whether they just have a construction permit, or they're operating under program test authority. In fact, if precedent is any guide, there probably shouldn't even be an article yet. Not going to get into a thing about it, though - I've seen you around enough to know that you're a good hand. Their license filing has also been accepted so, government nonsense aside, it ought to be issued reasonably soon.

Enjoy your Saturday! Mlaffs (talk) 22:15, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I hope you have enjoyed your Saturday and now Sunday! Thanks for all of your tireless efforts! As for WWRI-LP, I thought once it hit the air and we had a source that it was fair game. I definitely agree with not having every C.P. having its own page. We'd be stuck with pages for thousands of "stations" that never see the light of day. I had to keep a few off of the Cape Cod template a while ago.

Have an awesome weekend! Thanks for writing! :) Stereorock (talk) 06:28, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of

Zeitgeist Movement.
The details of these sanctions are described here

.

uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here

. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Hello. In case you haven't seen my notification in the wnyc section above. I've responded to your comments.Please see the wnyc talk page. Thank you. Formulairis990 (talk) 17:21, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that a comma is permitted with four digits, but the point is that the article was correct previously. Please don't change from one correct style to another just because you prefer the latter. I will refrain from reverting those edits of yours - please refrain from making them in the future. Ok? Jeh (talk) 05:31, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per the third paragraph of the lede of

WP:MOS, "Where more than one style is acceptable, editors should not change an article from one of those styles to another without a good reason." If you had a reason other than simply "because I like it this way," then forget I said anything. (But please do put that reason in your edit summary in the future. Thanks!) Jeh (talk) 02:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

It's what they taught in school. Anything with more than 3 groupings received a comma. The only things that didn't were years. Thanks, by the way, for your patience in awaiting my reply. I work Wednesday-Sunday which doesn't leave much time for answering; at least as not as much as I would like. I also want to thank you for your vigilance in making sure WP:NOTRADIOGUIDE is enforced as well as WP:NOTTVGUIDE.Stereorock (talk) 03:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Most of what we were taught in school is a gross oversimplification. :) Per

WP:MOS, both no-comma and comma are acceptable for four digits. Yes, MOS would dictate commas for five-digit SW frequencies but IMO that's a case of "defer to the sources". Jeh (talk) 13:41, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

That last sentence made me laugh and reminded me of a line that goes something like "I never learned to think in school." Yup, MOS style allows for both. The pages should be consistent, and I'm not going to contest any changes that brings the pages into harmonyStereorock (talk) 13:55, 29 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Additional: I think

WP: WPRS needs to weigh in so its codified. Right now, S.W. stations' frequencies are a gray area. Maybe WP: Radio should weigh in too. For me, it seems when a whole band exists over 1 of a base unit vs. 1,000, then the smaller number takes precedence, which is why I prefer MHz for S.W. frequencies. Admittedly, there are a lot of shortwave stations giving their frequencies in kHz, which clouds matters. If we harmonize listings, we'll be doing something even the stations themselves can't agree about.Stereorock (talk) 14:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Sorry but I've been a SWL since the mid-60s... you are mistaken. For current refs, see for example this online guide and this sample page from the WRTH. For older, try the SWL column from this 1971 issue of EI (you'll have to scroll to page 38 for that one), or this one from 1967 Popular Electronics (page 83), etc., etc. here are a couple of Sony SW portables - my ICF 2010 agrees. As does my little Tecsun PL-380. You will find exceptions in some radios (the Icom R75 is one and I believe the Kenwood tabletops are, as well) but kHz with no digit separator is and has long been the notation used in SW program listings. Jeh (talk) 14:32, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those links! I started SWLing about a quarter-century after you, around 1991. I am a student of radio history and enjoy reading as much historical material as I can. I have seen in old FCC documents (1930s-1940s) that they gave the frequencies in Mc. vs. kc. and the radios showed Mc. as well. I suppose that's due to the fact that, for example 2 and 10 take up less space than 2,000 and 10,000 do on an analog dial. I have a 1979 Zenith Transoceanic that has the frequencies in MHz and I don't know this, but suspect listing kHz became more common once digital receivers came about. I have a Radio Shack DX-402 with kHz figures, but have a cheapy portable that has it in MHz. But, I realize I am just rambling. I should go to bed. Oh, one last thing-you seem to be versed in SI units. Was it 1960 when cycles fell by the wayside in favor of hertz? That is my understanding which is why I wrote cycles for events happening between circa 1924-1959, and hertz from 1960-now. The changeover seems to have coincided with the 1960 metric conference. OK, I'm tired. Goodnight and 73! Maybe I'll work you on the bands one day as I see you're a ham too.Stereorock (talk) 03:45, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re the pattern for shortwave freqs, well, I did give you two old magazine refs from the pre-Hertz era that used kc (with no comma) for their shortwave columns. I believe it was the 1960 conference that recommended the changeover - it was not mandatory - and manufacturers and publishers just got around to it whenever it was convenient. Electronics Illustrated was by the way an SI holdout; they stuck with kc, megacycles, etc. for many years after PE switched. (The real joy there is that all of those old EI, PE, RE, etc., issues are online!)

I understand the rationale for using kc., etc., for things that happened in those times. After all if you look up the old FCC docs you will not find any kHz or MHz. But in general

astonishment": The vast majority of WP readers likely never heard of "kilocycles", so the information just flows more smoothly into the brain if we stick to the more familiar unit name, even though there's no numeric conversion. Jeh (talk) 06:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

It always helps when a user in a disagreement sees the opposite view & the reason you listed is why I put things in cycles, as Hz would be anachronistic. When I would read it, it seemed anachronistic, but I completely get that most people wouldn't know cycles; I didn't until the late 1980s when I was about 10. You make a good point about cubits & Goa'uld: I've never heard of the latter & only know the former from trying to read the Bible when I was younger (I gave up). I still am not sure what the hell a cubit is, although it sounds like an '80s' educational game, like a Spirograph.Stereorock (talk) 19:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cubit? I don't even know it!Stereorock (talk) 11:56, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Goa'uld are a race of "ancient astronauts", and the original Big Bad, from the Stargate franchise. In that continuity, the Goa'uld either built the pyramids or coerced the Egyptians to do so, were the actual "Egyptian gods", and seeded humans on many planets. From memory I think a cubit was about the length of a human forearm; I could never be bothered to look it up :) Jeh (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look here. Jeh (talk) 07:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation confirmed they're the same account. Both have been indefinitely blocked. Watch out for similar patterns in the future. Jeh (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And another one was found and indefblocked after just seven edits. Jeh (talk) 04:40, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for starting that. I'm sorry that I didn't get a chance to put in some other evidence I had found, but thank you for that! I shall watch for those patterns. Now, who knows if the changes said user made (like slogans, etc.) are even accurate. That's gonna be a big job!Stereorock (talk) 22:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's justification in P&G for deleting any slogan entry that doesn't have a reference. Besides, most stations these days have more than one, they change them the way I change my socks, and who's to say what "the" slogan is? Nor should we try to keep up with multiple ones. Jeh (talk) 04:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I get a feeling the banned editor was listening to the stations' streams and every time a liner was played, the slogan category got changed. True, a station can have more than one slogan, and I have no problem with not being up-to-the-second. But, I wonder about some of the edits; there were a few that said something like "Such & Such A Place's 24-hour news and traffic station". They were for stations that weren't news all-night. A WCBS or WINS I can see with that slogan, but not in Toledo.Stereorock (talk) 04:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I rec'd notification that my additions on Pacifica were reverted. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pacifica_Radio&oldid=prev&diff=714661159

Pacifica edits I added and then I put on their Talk page to explain what/why were 'reverted' by you same day ? why? There were no explanations nor reasons for corrections made... and they are Not now on the Pacifica page at all. Not just the 2 'citations' removed, nor corrected ? What I contributed is all gone there now.

[did I not do those correctly to put them there ? where then? Those references contain more information for Updating on Current Pacifica process in those 2 references - for readers' expanded information]

Please respond. Obviously I am not a tech person -- but fully informed and updated on many, not all, happenings at both KPFK and Pacifica -- and want Wikipedia to be up to date, not antiquated and useless.

I had inserted 2 more headings / topics that are also eliminated since your 'revert'.

If my knowledge and readings-learnings = that are neutral and not partial nor personally/ financially interested, nor conflict of interests, etc. is unwanted and unexamined, and just reverted/deleted, then I can leave and know Wikipedia is not what it claims to be.

Very very old info was in these two radio station related sites before, mostly written by those promoting their own shows/programs. My attempts to update them some finally and provide actual information and also references as to where to get more info have been deleted.

Please respond. thanks. my limited know how re HTML, etc. should not be a reason to reject me & my contributions. Activistrep (talk) 22:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)activistrep[reply]

I'm not super-knowledgeable on HTML either. From what I remember of that particular revision, it was because you put in, and numbered, references that weren't connected to any body of text. What were your liked references in reference to? It looked like you just added links. They weren't references, but just links. Those go in the external links section. As for subsequent revisions, you'll have to ask whomever pulled them down why they did that. If they were just to some angry Guy's YouTube video who had a bone to pick with Pacifica, that might not be seen as a quality link. I don't know, I never clicked on your links Stereorock (talk) 04:52, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) PMFJI, but... One: Stereorock only deleted the two links you added at the end of the references section. He didn't do any of the other deletions you're on about.

Two: I'd have deleted those links also. Per

WP:ELNO

, item 11, if nothing else. Both of them are basically gripe sites, neither shows a shred of a sign of editorial oversight. And as SR said, you just made up two numbers (which would have been wrong the next time a proper ref was added) and did not tie them to anything in the text you added to the article. If I see ill-formatted references I'll usually fix them up, but in this case there was no way to know how to do that (and no editor is going to pore through your text to see where you might have wanted them to go).

Editing WP is very little about HTML. WP has its own markup notation. There is help all over the site; you could start

with this

. Or you can try the visual editor. But if you just want to put a "bare" reference to a web site into an article, you can use <ref>your_URL_goes_here</ref>. Or if you want to add a description of the site you can use <ref>[your_URL_goes_here your_description_goes_here]</ref>. Someone else will turn it into the fancier "cite web" or whatever form. You'll get the hang of that soon (it's not difficult).

I see you've already started discussion at the article talk page and I may answer further there. Jeh (talk) 05:01, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to comment here. Jeh (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited FM broadcasting, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WHC. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm SLBedit. I noticed that you recently removed some content from S.L. Benfica without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Was it a mistake? SLBedit (talk) 00:53, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is this change gramatically correct? SLBedit (talk) 23:27, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, the word 'the' would be appropriate in this case.Stereorock (talk) 23:32, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. What about "by Globe Soccer Awards"? Thanks in advance. SLBedit (talk) 02:45, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's Globe referring to, a newspaper or something else? Boston has the Boston Globe, for example. If Globe is something else, it may be OK (like if Globe is the proper name for a TV station, for example. Can you give more of the paragraph so I can see the context? Thanks!Stereorock (talk) 03:25, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Benfica received the award for Best Academy of the year by Globe Soccer Awards. SLBedit (talk) 21:45, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's works. I wish I could explain better when we use "the" in English, I know it can be a bit confusing at times; it can even vary within dialects. For example, in the U.S., we say "go to the hospital" whereas in the U.K., it's "go to hospital." I am unsure why it varies like it does. If you would like me to look over any further sentences, please let me know! By the way, it sounds like "Globe Soccer Awards" would use a "the" if the sentence were "...Best Academy of the year at the Globe Soccer Awards." The 'at' would change the use of 'the'.Stereorock (talk) 22:24, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to "at the". Thanks. SLBedit (talk) 02:02, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you an administrator or moderator for Wikipedia? Based on your recent edits on blanking sections of pages. MikeM2011 (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not. If you are concerned about my blanking program schedules of broadcast stations, please see

WP:NOTTVGUIDE. Wikipedia is not an electronic program guide for broadcast stations. If you are simply looking for an admin or moderator, I wish I could help, but I am not, nor have I ever been nominated. Sorry for the brevity of this and hope it doesn't come across coarse! Stereorock (talk) 04:30, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

stereorock guy keeps reverting my contents instead of assisting in any errors in processing HTML and claims biases untrue and wrong. There is no opinion but actual updated reporting of difficult to obtain changes occurring in these radio stations. I have no bias, no sides, no views I want to advertise nor promote, tho you make such wild accusations for your own reasons. Please explain if you know more Facts and Current Events happening at either radio station or umbrella to 5 radio stations. I am not on any board, not benefited and not spinning in any directions, other than wanting others to be updated, and to learn and know what is so difficult to be publicly known. If you have more direct factual information, please advise. Otherwise, I have learned from reverts that Wikipedia is controlled by those who want to control actual, factual info, keeping only old material that was spun before, and thus left on Wikipedia as-if history were accurate here. It apparently is Not. A big lesson learned about this site - that this is not public-contributions place with reports neutrally shown, but controlled and "reverted" endlessly by some who insist only their reverts, views, or allowances are seen here. This must be more than what happens 'only to me' ...sad. Wikipedia is thus not at all info reliable or current at all. Activistrep (talk) 22:04, 20 August 2016 (UTC) activistrep Aug 20 2016[reply]

to Stereorock and his supporter Jeh : who have decided that only the Perfect and Wikipedia experts need contribute. And now, given just a bit of new revelations of why my prior reverts were continually & abruptly done, this contributor shall resign. Easily. And let the site remain as antiquated, not verified- nor current, be stuck there. And no one cares if "the public's" image is fake of what this site has implied Wikipedia to be. This faked image of providing the public valid current information - and that contributors genuinely write and allow others to add current/updated information in here not so true -a false reputation has been revealed. Not as what has been declared or desired for readers here. -But what a dismaying discovery for me !

Note that "KFPK" page -History goes all the way to 1992 ...and no programs current or past are listed. And Funding is totally out of date.

Then on "Pacifica" page: The 2002 to 2009 history is not all neutral info nor sources and "oped news" referenced is a person's blog with opinions included too. Which blogs used here that are 'verifiable' and which are to be discredited is not clear. But who cares ?

The work and due diligence already given here is being reverted and retracted, leaving Wikipedia's pages on these topics as un-informative and the old-slants-only available for your readers. You win. It's easy to exit from here. There are more valuable ways to spend time and work. Activistrep (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)activistrep aug 24 2016[reply]

I was wondering about the market it was in, because the most recent market map says that only southern Bristol county is in the New Bedford market, which would automatically exclude WPEP(Providence) and WWTA (Boston). Can you help explain the boundary of the Boston market? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newenglandradio (talk • contribs) 12:01, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What map are you using? The market would be defined by what Arbitron, now Nielsen Audio uses. I think for TV, Marion would be in the Boston DMA, but for radio, it's close to New Bedford-Fall River. I'm not sure which radio market WPEP was in & there are some that are confusing like the South Shore stations (WATD, WATD-FM, WPLM, WPLM-FM).Stereorock (talk) 19:05, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Look up the 2012 Arbitron map, and you'll see that all of Plymouth county is considered part of the Boston radio market. Also, what MSA would you consider Wareham in? It is technically part of Boston, but, like with the two Plymouth stations, they blanket their signal into the Cape Cod market. Newenglandradio (talk) 00:19, 8 October 2016 (UTC)Newenglandradio[reply]

That is interesting. I never knew that map existed! I don't believe there are any stations in Wareham. Since this is all new information for me, I'll say this: what I've done in the past has been dictated by "where is that signal strongest?" WWTA could never be heard in Boston, but as the map shows, it's part of the "Boston" market & yet is very close to New Bedford. I'm not sure WWTA ever actually operated (I never heard it) & is defunct now anyway. Same goes for WPEP- when I worked there it was part of a part of the Providence market but I don't think it could be considered a "Providence" station by any stretch. I'm going to think more on this.Stereorock (talk) 18:52, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, Stereorock, what would you consider the boundaries of the non-existent Newport market? Because in the city of Newport, all of the New Bedford and Providence stations come in clearly, with the sole exception of WWBB. I even got WMNP today fairly strong, which has been happening every time I am in Providence. Do you think the Newport template should be abolished and put into the Providence and/or New Bedford templates much like the Boston TV template has an area for Manchester-locals? Of course, three Newport area stations are on the New London market template due to their proximity, but I think that they also come in fairly well in portions of the Providence market. What is your take? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newenglandradio (talk • contribs) 00:23, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard WXEX go up as far north as Freeport with a reception fairly similar to Boston stations in Providence, and likewise, WHTP and WBQQ both have good reception in Dover and Rochester. Both of these stations have somewhat interchangeable market-wise, to the extent that a some Seacoast NH businesses advertise WHTP, and likewise, I've heard some Portland companies on WXEX. All three stations have appeared one both templates at one time or another. What markets are these stations in? Newenglandradio (talk) 00:19, 8 October 2016 (UTC)Newenglandradio[reply]

Are you in

WP:WPRS? That's a good place to ask a lot of questions radio-related.Stereorock (talk

)

Do you think we should add an "Adjacent Locals" section for radio templates, much like those in television templates? I know that some templates have "nearby markets" at its bottom, but so do TV stations. Newenglandradio (talk) 18:52, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe do I think like counties are in that, let's say you're in Providence, east would be New Bedford, New London southwest etc..Stereorock (talk) 03:33, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you in

WP:WPRS? That's a good place to ask a lot of questions radio-related.Stereorock (talk) 22:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

I'll move Shortwave to equal prominence with AM and FM and sort things out a bit further. Is there anything else you'd like to see done for organization of the template? RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 23:50, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ha-I see what you did there! ;p The one thing that I can think of off the top of my head is what to do about the Time/Frequency stations which are both utility AND broadcast stations all in one, that don't necessarily broadcast on those wavebands. Should they be their own line, or do you think they should go inbetween the bands? Some are on the band edges, like WWV's signals on 2.5 & 10 MHz, but its 20 & 25 MHz signals are off on their own (5MHz is within the 60-meter band) and not near a waveband. The same goes for CHU on 7.85 & 14.67MHz, for example. Personally, I like everything going up in ascending order of frequency on the template from 153 kHz to 162.55 MHz, so I am fine with the time/frequency standard stations' frequencies being on their own lines (so the WWV/WWVH 20 MHz signals are on their own between 15 & 13 meters, for example). What are your thoughts?Stereorock (talk) 03:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, you already did it! Never mind!Stereorock (talk) 03:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's what's called "ninja editing". done without anyone even noticing until way afterwards :D RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 03:44, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stealth...nice! ;)Stereorock (talk) 21:53, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The

]

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the here !

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for your efforts in fighting vandalism. I've declined several of your recent

Hey Stereorock, I noticed you flipped the AM and FM order at Template:Ciudad Juárez Radio. I had asked for some comment on this when you did it to Template:Mexico State Radio a while back (look up on the page) and never got a reply.

Would it be OK to keep the Mexican templates as FM first, AM second? Most of the stations are on FM, and I feel that it would make sense given the environment.

I didn't see that call for comments, sorry! To me, it's natural that A.M. comes first as it is the lower frequency, it is the senior service, & in Mexico, the callsigns (XE) come before the F.M. calls (XH). I was keeping with a lot of the American templates (& some British, Japanese, Canadian, etc.). Also, I would place shortwave in between A.M. & F.M., then if Mexico has weather radio on the 162MHz band, that would go last (unless there is broadcasting further up in frequency). It seems natural & logical to me that the templates go in ascending frequency (some of the British ones do, starting with Longwave). I hope this helps!Stereorock (talk) 03:13, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It does...I disagree with your assessment (given that there are more FMs than AMs in almost all of the boxes and that AMs tend to be second-fiddle), but you do have a good explanation. Only one box even has any shortwave on it (Mexico City). You might also have noticed that some of the templates, namely the newer ones I did when some of the templates had to be split for sanity, take a different tack (e.g. {{

t • c) 20:18, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

The popularity of the A.M. band should not be the deciding factor in its placement as that is subject to the whims of humanity. A.M.s could become the top-ranked band tomorrow (highly unlikely, but possible). The frequencies, however, will always be the frequencies & to me it makes sense for them to go from D.C. to daylight (LW first, then A.M., then S.W., then F.M., then weatherband, then digital audio broadcast (except for HD radio which should be on a separate line further down due to its digital nature. Then, it should follow all analog stations)).

Hi you were removing radio schedules of KBS Cool FM, KBS Radio 2, SBS Love FM and SBS Power FM which were important information to kpop fans who want to know the programs of the mentioned stations, please don't remove the schedules and since your'e not a kpop fan don't mess with things that are not your interests or business. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyunah661992 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Read

WP:NOTRADIOGUIDE. It's Wikipedia policy to not include program schedules of radio & TV stations as Wikipedia is not an electronic program guide. Therefore, any reverting of removing the guides, or addition of said guides is against Wikipedia policy & will be deleted.Stereorock (talk) 11:10, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Concur with Stereorock. Per

WP:ITSUSEFUL). Thank you for your understanding. Jeh (talk) 12:26, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

The same btw applies to lists of non-notable on-air personnel. Unless they're notable for something other than "they're an on-air personality" these are basically employee lists, which we don't do. Radio and TV stations go through on-air people like raisins through a rabbit, usually with about as much historical import. Jeh (talk) 02:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stereorock... Would you mind giving your opinion on this, as a reply to my entry there? Jeh (talk) 01:57, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Victory!

Take a look here. Jeh (talk) 17:20, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nice!!! You spearheaded it, congrats to you, good sir!!!Stereorock (talk) 20:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Arbitron-Market-Maps/Arb_US_Metro_Map_14.pdf Notice that on this map, all of Plymouth County is included in the Boston (not New Bedford) markets. Just letting you know. 146.115.137.44 (talk) 18:12, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jazz Radio Stations in New Jersey has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:22, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jazz Radio Stations in Massachusetts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:22, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ESPN Rhode Island has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:51, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mainstream Rock Radio Stations in Rhode Island has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Navigation_template#Properties, which says that "a navigation template with fewer than a handful of links can easily be replaced by "See also" sections, or relevant Error: no page names specified (help). and Error: no page names specified (help). links within the articles' sections." There is no point in having a navbox with only one single link in it, ever. There's no navigational purpose at all with just one or two links in the box. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Active Rock Radio Stations in Massachusetts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 14:26, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was researching part-15 AM radio stations on wikipedia, and that was listed as one of them. I forget exactly which article had it, though. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 23:05, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it is a Part 15 station; I believe part15.us has it.Stereorock (talk) 23:06, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jazz Radio Stations in Massachusetts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:58, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Montevideo Radio has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:08, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Other Radio Stations in Connecticut has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:33, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Other Radio Stations in New Jersey has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:33, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

I'm stirring up trouble ;) again at [1]. I would appreciate your thoughts. Jeh (talk) 09:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure-sounds like fun!!! Stereorock (talk) 15:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Stereorock. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't undo my edit on WYBC-FM. If you look at any of the other radio station articles i.e.

The channel number still exists, and the stations you mentioned to me are all A.M. stations, which do not have channel numbers, only F.M. stations do. There are several articles around Wikipedia that DO have their associated F.M. channel numbers. So what if it's "antiquated"; F.M. channel numbers still exist, and have been found on F.M. receivers.Stereorock (talk) 19:00, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I noticed that you were the last to edit the KPWK article. Keep an eye on that article, as well as KBKS, over the next day or so. It is heavily rumored that KPWK will change formats to revive it's former "KUBE" branding and format and that KBKS will make a corresponding move back to Top 40. Strikerforce^Talk 20:02, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, thanks! There's an IPv6 editor who keeps adding the program schedule against WP:NOTRADIOGUIDE, so please keep your eyes peeled for that!Stereorock (talk) 20:04, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Duly noted. Strikerforce^Talk 20:07, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can check tomorrow, but I'm fairly sure that list of music artists was cited. The database which was used when I added it is only accessible at certain libraries, but there might be another database I can get to tomorrow.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:02, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I looked at the last edit before my initial one, but saw 6 sources, which is how many there are now. Granted, I haven't done a side-by-side comparison. My opinion is this (& it's just my opinion)-the list of bands probably isn't necessary as the AAA format does have some core artists. I am imagining every classic rock station's page saying "WWRX played the Stones, Aerosmith, Led Zepplin,..."; "WFYV-FM played the Stones, Aerosmith, Led Zepplin,..."; there are core artists which AAAs probably all play too, making it redundant. The other thing is saying which bands segued into which other bands reads to me like inside baseball, y'know, or that a fan wrote it. I'm just trying to keep it neutral.Stereorock (talk) 19:27, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only put the list there because the source had them. AAA is not one of these formats where every station sounds the same. I've done this for other stations too. WLQB is another station in that area which was considered unique, and listing the bands seemed like a good idea. Also, several Regional Mexican stations. If sources list artists on individual stations, that seems like a good way to say what Regional Mexican is. Another way might be to put what those sources say in the Regional Mexican article. Anyway, I'm off to double check the source and if you'd like to see what it says, I can email the text.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:33, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did notice WGHJ, with different letters back in the day, had a simulcast partner now called WFBT (FM). The artists are there too.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:37, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a compromise, I would consider "Broadcast play-by-play" as the subsection header (see proposal here). It would eliminate your concern of FM-vs-AM, and it would retain my preference to emphasize that play-by-play is available *only* over-the-air. Levdr1lp / talk 20:07, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Levdr1lp I just replied before I saw this, so I think your proposal takes my concern into effect too.Stereorock (talk) 20:25, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're ok with my proposal, but before I change the heading, I just want to make sure we're in agreement. (Just to be sure.) Levdr1lp / talk 21:13, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am in agreement with your proposal! :DStereorock (talk) 21:20, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks-- glad we could resolve this! (By the way, I do live in Northeast Ohio, and I listen to all kinds of local radio in the Cleveland market. If ever you need something which doesn't stream online, let me know.) Levdr1lp / talk 21:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate that! :D Stereorock (talk) 23:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Stereorock. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Notifying you because you were involved with edits, so maybe you know something.)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article KBXZ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KBXZ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Closeapple (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Portuguese Radio Stations in Massachusetts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:36, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Other Radio Stations in Arkansas has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:21, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain what you mean by putting a translator in its "proper ITU place" as you have done in Template:Newport Radio? I've always understood that when sorting, numeric characters preceded alpha characters (even in the ASCII table). When readers are looking at the list of callsigns, they're expecting it to be sorted with the numerics coming first. --DrChuck68 (talk) 03:28, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here was my answer before. I was using lists from ham radio logbooks but in checking the ITU’s website just now, I see they have it differently on their website [2]. Here was my reply for your benefit. It now appears the one advantage left is that it would put translators (secondary) after the full-power stations (primary). “Sure thing! When I have seen tables of international callsign blocks listed, they have always grouped them starting with AAA-ALZ & not the first numeric group, which would be 2AA-2ZZ. This tells me that the ITU prefers numbers to come after all-letter groups. I will say that I too expect to see numbers before letters preceded letters, but apparently that isn’t the way the ITU sees it & since they are the governing body for international callsign allocations, I was following this method. The other upshot is that the translators, a secondary service, are issued following the full-power stations, in keeping with their secondary status. I hope that helps!”

That's certainly interesting, and not something I've heard before. However, when I went to the link you posted, 2AA-2ZZ came before AAA-ALZ. I even tried it in both Firefox and Chrome browsers, but the numeric groups still came up first. --DrChuck68 (talk) 13:04, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My source before was the ARRL logbooks. I hadn’t gone to the ITU site, but this morning was the first time I had. I figured the ARRL wouldve gotten it right, or that’s how things used to be listed! Sorry for that! Your browsers are displaying correctly. That being said, maybe there is something to be said for listing translator calls after full-power due to their status, but I think that would be a project-wise discussion.Stereorock (talk) 13:52, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature didn't appear next to your vote!.