Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/WWJ-TV/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by David Fuchs via FACBot (talk) 19 November 2023 [1].

WWJ-TV edit

Nominator(s): Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC), User:Nathan Obral[reply]

Ask either of us about the most culturally significant TV station we've written and this will be our unequivocal answer. Channel 62 in Detroit started life in September 1975, after a years-long struggle to secure financing, as WGPR-TV, the first Black-owned TV station in the United States. Owned by a Black Masonic group, it was a high-visibility station at its launch with very ambitious programming plans, key portions of which never materialized. However, some of its local shows stuck, and it produced a string of notable local and national Black broadcast professionals. In 1994, a major TV station affiliation switch swept the nation and left CBS looking for a new affiliate in Detroit. CBS failed to secure a better station, and the desperate network bought WGPR-TV from the International Free and Accepted Modern Masons, in the process removing the Black- and community-oriented programming channel 62 had long carried (and raising some community outcry). Today, the former WGPR studios are on the National Register of Historic Places, and in the old TV studio is a museum devoted to its history.

CBS renamed the station WWJ-TV, for the radio station it owned there. For many years, it never thoroughly invested in this high-number station. It floated but quickly abandoned an attempt to start a news department in 1995; upon merging with WKBD-TV, that station's ailing news department briefly extended to channel 62 before dying; and there was a morning weather-and-news program for a few years. That changed in a big way in February, when a full online streaming service and news department known as CBS News Detroit debuted.

This is a big dog of a project, and it's one that we have found quite fulfilling. It is also Nathan's first time at FAC. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

  • Don't use fixed px size
    • Fixed by script.
  • File:William_V._Banks.jpg needs a stronger FUR. Why is it necessary to visually identify the individual here, when he has his own article?
    • Also leaving room for Nathan to chime in. The association with WGPR-TV and Banks is incredibly strong—the museum in the former WGPR studio is named for him. I can understand the concern and that typically images like this are restricted to the subject's biography. It'd make sense to beef up the FUR, but Nikkimaria, do you think it should just be removed at this point?
    • Nathan here! For some context, Dr. Banks founded the Modern Masons in 1950, led the organization when it purchased WGPR radio and was instrumental in WGPR-TV even taking to the air. It even became a family affair of sorts; his daughter gave up a career as a college instructor to manage the station's day-to-day affairs. Station personnel have credited Dr. Banks for making them look beyond a show's budget to focus on the substance. That was largely why I had chosen to include his picture here, as he was almost inextricable. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 05:54, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm certainly not going to argue for excising any discussion of him, but I'm not convinced there is significant value to including a non-free image of him. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:20, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        @Nikkimaria Decided to remove the photo here. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Yeah, this wasn’t a dealbreaker in any way. I’m fine with the removal. :) Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 15:43, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:WGPR_TV.png has an incomplete FUR
  • File:WWJTV_CBS_Detroit.png: if this is non-free it will need a stronger FUR, but why is it believed this is non-free and the lead logo is too simple to warrant copyright protection? They are of similar design so it seems logical either they are both free or they are both non-free.
    • Frankly, an editor in 2009 who probably didn't know about PD-textlogo. That's the correct designation, imo, and I've retagged it appropriately. Comments to here: Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:38, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nikkimaria (talk) 04:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie edit

I'll make minor copyedits as I read through; feel free to revert anything you disagree with.

  • "It is owned by the network's CBS News and Stations group alongside WKBD-TV, an independent station; both stations share studios on Eleven Mile Road in the Detroit suburb of Southfield, while WWJ-TV's transmitter is located in Oak Park." Suggest "It is owned by the network's CBS News and Stations group alongside WKBD-TV, an independent station; the stations share studios on Eleven Mile Road in the Detroit suburb of Southfield. WWJ-TV's transmitter is located in Oak Park." "Both" is redundant with "share", and as far as I can tell there's no logical connection between the transmitter location and the previous clause, so it's better to split the sentence.
    • Changed.
  • Should there be a redlink for International Free and Accepted Modern Masons?
    • There probably could be an article here. I'd need to do more research.
  • "for $413,000 in United expenses": what is "expenses" telling us here?
    • You couldn't sell a construction permit for more money than the seller had spent trying to pursue it and on legal costs, etc.
  • "Land mobile interests pushed back against the sale": what are land mobile interests?
    • Added a link. Context: Land mobile radio was assigned the band 470–512 MHz to be shared with TV. Channel 20 is 506–512 MHz. They wanted more room to operate and thus the TV permit to be deleted.
  • "Despite being lower-rated and placing a heavy emphasis on gospel music and religious fare, particularly on Sundays, the Masons rebuffed an offer of $1.5 million for WGPR-FM in 1973": I don't follow the connection between the two halves of this sentence. I assume the implication is that this would have been a good price for a low-rated station? If so, can we source that well enough to say so? And why is the religious content relevant?
    • Reworded. No connection, really.
  • "The pursuit of a television station wholly owned and operated by Blacks was not without merit": suggest making this "not without business merit" -- my eyebrows went up when I read this, until I read the second half of the sentence.
    • Reworded
  • Do we have (even approximate) dates for Banks' attempted purchases of WXON-TV and WJMY?
    • Not in source. But Dr. Banks was determined to enter this side of the industry because he wanted to change the stereotype image of blacks in TV and felt the only way to do that was to purchase a station andproduce black related programs. The only TV channel available at that time was WXON channel 62, Walled Lake, Mich. The owners were willing to sell for a million dollars. The Banks team (with Boykin) scurried around seeking a loan. They were tured down by the Ford Foundation, and were turned down at four Detroit banks. "Then we tried to contact the owners of TV channel 20 who had a construction permit but had not been able to get on the air," Boykin testified.
  • "had planned to host a game show named Countdown": does the "had planned" mean it never aired? If so, is this worth mentioning?
    • Added here. That is indeed correct.
  • 'the program inspired multiple popular area dance moves during competitions in what George White dubbed "electronic sociology"': what is an area dance move? And I don't understand White's comment.
    • Reworded: "locally popular dance moves". Removed the George White item which makes no sense in context.
  • "from both he and the band": grammatically this should be "him", but suggest rephrasing instead as that would sound awkward. Perhaps "and he and the band gave several gold records to the stations".
    • Reworded
  • I was surprised to discover that A Time to Live never aired, having gained the impression from earlier mentions that it had been on the air. Looking back at the first mention, I see it says "Proposed programs included ...". How about making it "Proposed programs, not all of which were eventually produced, included ..."?
    • Changed
  • Along the same lines, you have "A Time to Live, the star program ..." -- can we say it was the star if it never aired? Perhaps "A Time to Live, intended as the star program ..."?
    • Changed
  • " The PTL Club, which by 1976 was on channel 62 for four hours a day[36] and became one of the station's more popular religious programs.[45] By 1977, The PTL Club purchased 24 hours a week on the station": this is a reduction, but it's phrased as if it were an increase. Suggest "By 1977, The PTL Club was still purchasing 24 hours a week on the station".
    • Changed to not conflict.
  • "limited solely to the congregation as not all of the church's members consistently attended": I don't know what this means.
    • Reworded.
  • 'with the parable "the set is not the show"': parable is not the right word, as it refers to a story, not just a succinct phrase. Perhaps 'insisted a newer set for The Scene was not necessary, saying "the set is not the show"'.
    • Changed.
  • In the last sentence of "Turning to religion and creativity", what does "pre-empted" mean?
    • It wasn't uncommon back then that network affiliates would not air all the shows provided by the network. In that case, they were often offered to other local stations.
  • "Unsolicited offers were also received for channel 62": why "also"? Because Mathews, or the group of Masons that were his co-plaintiffs, was interested in purchasing the channel? If so we should make that clearer.
    • Reworded
  • "consequently, Mathews took WGPR off the market": as far as I can see we haven't said it was on the market. We've said there were unsolicited bids but that's all.
    • Reworded.
  • Is R. J. Watkins worth a redlink?
  • "an uneven programming structure that still weighed heavily on religious fare": I think you mean "weighted towards"; as written this means it had a negative effect on religious fare.
    • Yeah, good catch.
  • File:WGPR TV.png is very dark. I would suggest lightening it quite a bit, unless it really was this dark on screen. If you don't have tools that can do that I can do it if you like.
    • That's a direct screenshot from tape. WGPR was not the best station technically and was at times quite inartful.
  • "the network seemed more interested in an acquisition than a purchase": what's the difference? Does purchase refer to an affiliation contract? If so I'd make it "than affiliation", or something similar.
    • Typo on my part.
  • "Even as the station never truly fulfilled its promised potential, WGPR-TV has been regarded as a needed starting point for many budding careers." Suggest shortening to "Even as the station never fulfilled its promised potential, WGPR-TV a starting point for many budding careers".
    • Changed.
  • "An NRHP plaque would be affixed": why "would be" rather than "was"?
  • "those programs started to become more expensive to purchase and thus made local news cheaper": "cheaper" is surely not right -- should this be "more competitive", or "a more attractive option"?
    • Fixed.
  • 'McMahon later described her initial reaction as, "...I thought to myself, 'This never happens. Until now.'"' I don't really see the value of this quote -- what is is trying to tell the reader? Just that McMahon was surprised?'
    • It's so unusual that I felt the quote was useful.
  • The CBS News Detroit section's second paragraph is partly in the future tense, even though the launch has now happened.
    • Fixed.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:54, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • In the process of untangling the various items here. Thank you, Mike. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @Mike Christie Everything should be addressed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Almost everything above is fixed, so I won't bother to strike individual points. Just one point left:

  • Re McMahon's quote: What's unusual about the situation? If you can convey to a reader why it's unusual the quote would seem more natural.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:55, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Mike Christie: Revamped that area a little bit to change the focus and make it more understandable. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:18, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Last fix is good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:20, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Epicgenius edit

I will leave some comments soon, likely on Monday. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:12, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

  • Paragraph 2 - "channel 62 in Detroit holds the distinction of being the first Black-owned television station" - Why not just "channel 62 in Detroit was the first Black-owned television station"?
Done.
  • Paragraph 2 - "did not fully pan out" - I'd change this to something like "were not entirely successful" to make it more encyclopedic.
I went with "were not entirely successful due to economic and financial limitations" which should better make sense in context.
  • Paragraph 2 - "The original studios for WGPR-TV, still in use by the radio station, have been preserved as a museum and recognized as a cultural landmark, with inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places." - Are you referring to the NRHP designation as a cultural landmark designation? Or is there a separate cultural landmark designation that you're talking about? Usually, the NRHP designation is considered a historic-landmark designation, not a cultural one.
Gotcha. Reworded as a historical landmark.
  • Paragraph 3 - "WWJ-TV held a dubious distinction as the only station directly owned by" - This feels a bit unencyclopedic; I'd go with "WWJ-TV was the only station directly owned by..."
Done.

Prior use of channel 62 in Detroit:

  • "for a total of four years" - Do we need "a total of"?
Done. Went with "for four years".

More later. Epicgenius (talk) 01:58, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • In general, I noticed you use apostrophes inconsistently when there is a name ending with the letter "s". For example, I see "Brookes' " and "Bonds' ", but also "Banks's". Per MOS:POSS, these should all end with " 's" if singular, e.g. "Brookes's", "Bonds's". There is an exception for when these names are themselves part of another proper name, e.g. Diggs' Washington Forum.
  • Fixed those two to have 's.
WGPR-TV - Built by Masons
  • Para 1 - "International Free and Accepted Modern Masons" - I would add a link to Freemasonry somewhere. Also, was this particular sect largely composed of black members?
  • Para 2 - "WGPR-TV would thus become" - per WP:WOULDCHUCK, I would change this to "WGPR-TV thus became"
  • Done.
  • Para 2 - "telling Jet" - Probably worth noting that this is a magazine catering to the black community.
  • I went with "Jet, a nationally known weekly magazine aimed at the Black community"
  • Para 3 - "Construction took nearly two years, in part because lenders were unwilling to loan money to finance the station's start-up" - Construction of a transmitter and studio?
  • Altered to "The construction process"
Signing on with a local focus
  • The serial comma is used inconsistently. For example, I see sentences both without the comma (para 2: "I Spy, Rawhide and Up and Coming"; para 3: "James Brown, The Gap Band, The Time and Jermaine Jackson ") and with the comma (para 2: "The Abbott and Costello Show, Get Smart, and Felix the Cat and assorted B-movies").
  • Those should largely be straightened out. I removed the "and" before "Felix the Cat" as it felt slightly awkward.
  • Para 2 - "Consequently, channel 62 leaned heavily on local program production, much of it from scratch" - to specify, these were created by channel 62 itself?
  • Correct. Reworded to "...much of it created from scratch by the station."
  • Para 2 - By the way, it would be interesting if you had info on why these shows never aired (e.g. did executives scrap the shows, or did the producers themselves not follow through with creating these shows>)
  • Even if the station hadn't lost a great deal of money in their first year alone (expounded on more in the following section), the volume of local output was to have composed up to 90 percent of the station's programming lineup; that ratio was and remains impossible to achieve even in good economic conditions. I inserted the following... "Local production would account for 90 percent of WGPR-TV's entire schedule, an amount unheard of for the market's larger and more established stations." with an existing citation.
  • Para 3 - "Scene co-host Nat Morris was originally hired in 1972 for WGPR-FM and was simply given directions to play music" - Should it be "was given directions to simply play music", since "simply" modifies "play music"?
  • Reworded to "...was simply given directions to play music on the program as if he were a disc jockey, with the cameras focusing on the dancers throughout." If it isn't clear enough (this is about The Scene, not the radio station), I can revise further.
  • Done.
  • Para 4 - "In the area of news, WGPR-TV's promise" - Is there a better way to word this, like "The promise of WGPR-TV's news department"? It seems somewhat awkward.
  • Fixed.
  • Para 4 - "Big City News targeted Detroit's urban population and eschewed the suburban audience, which was more interested in crime reporting that disproportionately covered Blacks" - Just to be 100% clear, it was the suburban audience that was interested in crime reporting that disproportionately covered Blacks? If so, I would say something like "Big City News targeted Detroit's urban population, eschewing the suburban audience that was more interested in crime reporting that disproportionately covered Blacks".
  • This is correct, and fixed.
  • Para 4: "One area of Big City News was technically innovative: it was the first television news operation in Detroit to use videotape for news-gathering purposes, eschewing film entirely" - I would cut "was technically innovative: it", e.g. "One area of Big City News was the first television news operation in Detroit to use videotape for news-gathering purposes, eschewing film entirely".
  • I also chopped off "One area of" as it didn't make grammatical sense, so the sentence reads "Big City News was also the first television news operation in Detroit to use videotape for news-gathering purposes, eschewing film entirely."
Financial and technical challenges
  • Para 1: "Amyre Makupson's situation was not unique, as the station's early months were very rough. Technical failures were common; broadcast hours were cut back; and programming plans were curtailed after just one month when Banks felt the station was losing too much money" - I would condense this to something like "The station's early months were very rough: Technical failures were common..."
  • Done.
  • Para 1: "at the end of (1975)" - Usually I use [square brackets] to indicate something that isn't in the text, but I guess MOS:BRACKET doesn't say anything about what happens if the quoted source itself uses parentheses. Interesting.
  • Para 2: "Substantial downsizing and reorganizations took place at WGPR-TV: the news department was reduced from twelve people to six[21]: 42  and Blocker departed after less than a year on the advice of a doctor[29] while Sharon Crews left at the end of 1976 to join WGHP-TV" - Per WP:CINS, shouldn't there be a comma after "twelve people to six" and "advice of a doctor"? Ironically, I'm citing Sammi's own essay for this.
  • Fixed. I think Sammie Brie was having me fix this one lol.
  • Para 2: "Altogether, payroll was trimmed from $35,000 a month to $18,000 a month" can be condensed to "Altogether, monthly payroll was trimmed from $35,000 to $18,000".
  • Done.
  • Para 3: "few White-owned business were" - I think it should be "businesses".
  • Fixed.
  • Para 3: "Detroit's decreasing overall population and concurrently growing Black population—which by 1976 was larger than either Louisville, Kentucky, or Nashville, Tennessee" - Does this mean that the black population was larger than the total populations of either Louisville or Nashville, or that the black population was larger than the respective black populations of each city?
  • The total populations (see here). Reworded.
Turning to religion and creativity
  • Para 1: "generating $36,000 monthly" - Was this the amount The PTL Club paid, or was this the net income after expenses were subtracted from the amount paid?
  • The amount paid (see here). Redone to "By 1977, The PTL Club purchased 24 hours a week on the station, with the ministry paying $36,000 on a monthly basis."
  • Para 1: "Various ethnic groups also purchased airtime on WGPR-TV. ... Channel 62 also aired shows aimed at other ethnicities including" - The second instance of this seems a bit redundant. As such, I would say "Channel 62's other shows included Dino’s Greece, Polish Panorama, and Romanian Variety; ...".
  • Done.
  • Para 3: "Horror host Ron "The Ghoul" Sweed" - I recommend rephrasing this so the two links are not right next to each other per WP:SEAOFBLUE.
  • I went with "Ron "The Ghoul" Sweed, a local horror host..."
  • Para 4: "By the eighth year" - Given that it is a full 13 paragraphs since the station's founding is mentioned, you should probably clarify which year this is.
  • Reworded to "By 1983, after eight years of operation, channel 62 finally turned a profit and offered over 60 hours a week of local programming." The source didn't specify the exact year but it is easy to deduce.
After Banks's death
  • Para 2: "No sale materialized, and after a judge" - I'd put a comma after "and", since "After a judge ruled ... share in the market" can theoretically stand alone as a sentence.
  • Done.
  • Para 2: "Tenicia Gregory—who Mathews replaced as general manager—then sued Mathews" - Shouldn't it be "whom Mathews replaced", since "whom" is the object of that clause?
  • Fixed.
  • Para 2: "Mathews, who had no background in broadcasting and admitted to Ebony magazine that he was relying on people who were "competent and loyal" in his new job,[75] took over the station as the marketplace for television stations began to cool after several recent purchases were now deemed to have been at inflated prices; consequently, Mathews declared the station was not for sale." - This sentence is pretty long, so I recommend splitting it.
  • Split at the semicolon.
More later. It may take me a few days to go through this given that it's a long article. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:05, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Epicgenius: These changes should be accounted for. =^-^= Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 01:43, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Changes and controversies:
  • Para 2: "as little as $35 for thirty seconds" - I personally would add an {{inflation}} template here (even if it's in a footnote). $35 in 1987 is probably worth more than twice that today due to inflation.
  • Para 3: "Its programming rarely attracted significant viewership or community attention, with one exception: talk show Strictly Speaking, which was most famously hosted by Shaun Robinson." - Any idea how many people watched this? You mention community attention for this show but don't talk about viewership.
  • @Epicgenius: This needed a rewrite of sorts in lieu of not having ratings data for the station, but there was a good amount of local media coverage for the program, much more so that most of the station's efforts. It has been rewritten to: "One of WGPR-TV's local programs, the topical talk show Strictly Speaking, attracted significant community attention as the decade ended. Shaun Robinson joined channel 62 after graduating from Cass Technical High School and Spelman College; she initially appeared as a Big City News reporter but soon fronted Strictly Speaking, where one media outlet dubbed her "our own Oprah"." Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 17:45, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Para 4: "it aired CBS's The Pat Sajak Show in late-night" - Is there a word missing here, or is "late-night" short for something like late-night programming?
  • Para 4: "WGPR-TV did lose carriage" - Why is this "did lose" and not "lost"?
  • Para 5: "be granted back pay and the reinstatement of their jobs" - Similarly I'd go with just "be granted back pay and reinstated".
More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:08, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Handled all of these items but Strictly Speaking which I leave to @Nathan Obral. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 16:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
CBS comes calling:
  • Para 1: "The deal came on the heels of CBS losing the rights" - Can this be rewritten without the figure of speech "on the heels of"? That phrase doesn't sound too encyclopedic.
  • Reworded to "The deal came after Fox outbid CBS for the rights to National Football Conference football games..."
  • Para 1: "Over a three-month period," - Why not something like "over three months"?
  • Done.
  • Para 2: "Frank Adell. Adell was interested in CBS, but CBS offered him a poor deal" - To avoid having "Adell. Adell" and "CBS, but CBS" in such close proximity, I'd rephrase the second sentence.
  • Redone to "CBS also contacted WADL (channel 38), an independent station owned by Frank Adell, who was offered a poor deal despite his interest in CBS. Adell sought five years and compensation, in line with other deals the network was making with new affiliates, while the network merely offered him one year without any compensation payments."
  • Para 4: "but Arabo would not have been able to sell advertising to make a profit, causing him to decline the offer" - I'd condense this to something like "but Arabo declined the offer as he would not have been able to sell advertising to make a profit".
  • Fixed.
  • Para 5: "Joel Ferguson, who had been rebuffed in 1986, joined forces with Bing and Roy Roberts, an executive at General Motors, to propose operation as a Black-owned CBS affiliate; Ferguson claimed he had offered $31 million for channel 62 weeks before the Masons took the $24 million CBS bid[115] but Mathews claimed no such offer was ever made, saying, "There was no one else in line when CBS came to us"." - This sentence is quite long and should probably be split.
  • Split at the semicolon.
  • Para 5: "Representative John Conyers promised to pressure the FCC to reject the sale" - By the way, did sources ever mention whether he pressured the FCC to reject the sale, or whether the FCC took any action?
  • Given his ranking in Congress at the time, if he had been successful in lobbying the FCC to review the deal, there would have been coverage. Reworded to, "Representative John Conyers criticized the sale, believing that channel 62 could retain existing Black-focused programming if it remained Black-owned."
Legacy of WGPR-TV:
  • Para 2: "19 television stations were owned by African-Americans" should be "Nineteen television stations..." per MOS:NUMNOTES. Same thing goes for "300 surviving episodes" in para 5.
  • Fixed.
  • Para 2: "Byron Allen, a Detroit native, currently owns or operates 30 television stations" - as of when?
  • The number as of this year is 34 stations but press coverage on his most recent purchase counted it to 36. Sammi Brie and I think it was an erroneous count based on an FCC filing. For now, I worded it to "over 30 television stations as of 2023..."
  • Para 3: "which remain as the home to WGPR-FM," - I think "as" can be dropped.
  • Done.
  • Para 4: "The William V. Banks Broadcast Museum" - Was this at at the Detroit Historical Museum, the studio building, or somewhere else?
  • The studio building. Reworded to, "The former studios, renamed the William V. Banks Broadcast Museum in honor of WGPR-TV's founder..."
  • Para 4: "The achievement turned somber when Karen Hudson-Samuels died on February 9, 2021," - Does the source specifically mention the NRHP listing having occurred prior to Samuels's death? If not, I'd remove "The achievement turned somber when".
  • It did in source: A week before she died came a crowning achievement: On Feb. 1, the first day of Black History Month, the National Park Service announced it had granted the museum a listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the nation's official roster of important historic sites.
More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:42, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New name, new power, but no news:
  • Para 1: "making fun of the high channel position" - Was a high channel position bad?
  • It was very bad; in fact, it was one of the main reasons why the Fox-New World deal happened in the first place, to improve Fox's visibility by being on lower dial positions. Local press coverage referred to channel 62 as a "last resort" and "dire" for CBS specifically due to the channel number.
  • Para 2: "CBS signed a lease to move channel 62 to Stroh's River Place as temporary office space" - I would rephrase this as "CBS signed a short-term lease for office space at Stroh's River Place, moving channel 62 there". I gather from paragraph 3 that the lease was later expanded, so I wouldn't say "temporary office space".
  • Done.
  • Para 2: "Because of this, the station had to use the studio facilities of WTVS for Detroit: Making It Happen, a town hall meeting on January 31, 1995, with former WXYZ-TV anchorman Bill Bonds as moderator. Bonds's presence was as a freelancer as he signed a contract with WJBK-TV the next day" - I am confused as to why the second sentence is relevant to WWJ-TV. Wouldn't it be sufficient to say that Bonds was a freelance moderator? (Or maybe not even mentioning his freelancing status?)
  • I agree, it doesn't fit. Removed the second sentence and freelancing reference.
  • Para 2: "ratings for the Evening News declined precipitously" - Do we have any figures?
  • Yes we do, it turns out. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Para 4: " the tower would also be used" - Per WP:WOULDCHUCK, I would change this to "later, the tower was also used".
  • Done.
  • Para 5: "That April, CBS had felt the pain of not having more than a bureau with one correspondent in Detroit." - To me, "felt the pain" seems a little unencyclopedic; I'd suggest "experienced the drawbacks". I admit that's a bit more boring, but it's also more professional.
  • Reworded as such.
CBS-Viacom merger and 62 CBS News:
  • Para 1: "In 1999, Viacom, owner of WKBD, acquired CBS. In a number of markets, this combination created newly permitted duopolies between established CBS stations and UPN outlets." - The only other mention of UPN in this article is in the "CBS comes calling" section, where it is mentioned that Paramount was preparing to launch UPN. Thus, it may not be apparent why this created a duopoly between UPN outlets and CBS stations; one would have to know that Viacom is related to (or rather, absorbed) Paramount. As such, I would clarify this a bit.
  • I redid this to "Viacom, the corporate parent of Paramount and owner of UPN affiliate WKBD-TV, acquired CBS in September 1999. In a number of markets, this combination created newly permitted duopolies between established CBS stations and UPN outlets. However, in Detroit, WKBD was larger and had a functional local news department." As part of this, two sources were added to help explain this further (source one p1, p2) (source two p1, p2)
  • Para 3: "general manager Mike Dunlop and Viacom parted ways in August." - Why not just "general manager Mike Dunlop left Viacom in August"?
  • Done.
  • Para 4: "In September 2002, rumblings surfaced that Viacom was about to pull the plug on the WKBD–WWJ news operation—the last newsroom Viacom inherited from Paramount that was still operating[172]—which were met by lukewarm responses from executives" - What was met with lukewarm responses from executives? The WKBD–WWJ news operation, or the fact that it was about to be canceled?
  • The rumors of the closure. Reworded to "In September 2002, rumblings surfaced that Viacom was about to pull the plug on the WKBD–WWJ news operation—the last newsroom Viacom inherited from Paramount that was still operating. These rumors were met with lukewarm responses from executives after being contacted by a Free Press reporter."
I will finish this in a day or so. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"First Forecast":
  • Para 1: "That same year" - I'd change this to "That year" or "The same year".
  • Para 1: "The station's local output would consist" - Could this be "The station's local output consisted"?
  • Done both of these.
CBS News Detroit:
  • Para 1: "vice president/general manager" - Per MOS:SLASH, this should probably be changed. Do you mean that Watson is a vice president and general manager?
  • Yes. This is not uncommon in TV. Changed.
  • Para 3: "In January 2022, Paul Pytlowany, an employee of WKBD since 1988 and the director of local production and community affairs for WKBD and WWJ-TV since 2017, was named the founding news director" - Is it necessary to describe Pytlowany's credentials here, or would it be sufficient to mention that he was a 34-year employee of WKBD? (This is just a question, not a request to shorten the sentence; I won't force you to condense it.)
  • It's an unusual background for a news director, which is a specialized position. People that are NDs in a market like Detroit usually come from having ND'd other stations.
  • Para 4: "By year's end, the launch plan had changed, owing to supply chain- and pandemic-induced delays:" - Do you know how supply chain and pandemic-related issues would change the launch plan?
  • Reworded to be more faithful to source.
  • Para 4: "The morning newscast premiered early on February 20, 2023, to provide coverage of the shooting at Michigan State University,[204] before fully launching on March 6, co-anchored by former WDIV-TV anchor/reporter Sandra Ali and also featuring extended streaming-only segments." - I recommend splitting this into two sentences.
  • Split.
Local programming:
  • Is Michigan Matters the only original program that WWJ-TV produces?
  • Outside of local news, yes. When this article was rewritten, the news department was a future tense item, so this is kind of a standalone item. Gonna leave this to Nathan as I am really not sure how I'd want to structure or place this.
  • @Epicgenius and Sammi Brie: I folded it into the CBS News Detroit section with some slight restructuring. Also CBS News Detroit has been un-italicized throughout the article due to it referring to the streaming channel and not specific newscasts. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 00:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Technical information:
  • I know it might be customary for other TV station articles, but it still feels strange to have the "Subchannels" subsection be the only content in the "Technical information" section. Perhaps we could get rid of the subheader and/or add further info about this, if possible.
  • Removed the header here.
  • For navigation purposes in the infobox, I changed the section link in the "Affiliations" field from "Subchannels" to "Technical information". Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 00:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, I would suggest combining the two paragraphs, which are pretty short.
  • I added some info that should have been in paragraph 1 (repack). Paragraph 2 is thematically separate and I don't think combinable with paragraph 1.
@Nathan Obral and @Sammi Brie: That's all I have. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Epicgenius: Addressed nearly every item. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose. I think all issues have been satisfactorily addressed. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review edit

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • Some of the infobox details don't appear to be sourced anywhere
    • Technical information never has a footnote to it, at least on US pages for current broadcast stations, and comes from the FCC. (The link labeled "LMS" points to the FCC database page, and you can pull up a tab of technical data there.) Everything else should have a citation somewhere in that article.
      • Is there a policy/guideline supporting this exemption? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • It's kind of been how things have been done, but it's clear that won't fly. The result is actually a pretty big change: if an active US station has a Facility ID, the infobox will now have a generated citation to the FCC technical data page. This works for TV and radio and affects a five-digit number of pages. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ditto some of the details in the lead
    • I've added an item on the studio in the mainline as well. The LMS also has this item in it. Other items should all be cited somewhere else.
      • "most notable alumni" claim for example is not. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • Reworded to remove this claim.
  • Footnote 1 is incomplete. Ditto 203
    • FN 1 I have brought up to how I would do this now.
      • Similar sources have a retrieval date - why not this one? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • It is not required for linked documents that do not change. (WP:ACCESSDATE) History Cards were all prepared pre-1982 and were scanned from microfiche. Changes are unlikely to impossible (these are scans of printed documents that wouldn't require an access date). Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
          • But you include retrieval dates for other scans of printed documents, eg all the Newspapers.com refs. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:04, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In what cases are you including publisher location? ISSN?
    • Location was included by default in an older version of PressPass, the script I use to handle Newspapers.com clipping citation formatting. It was removed in a later release (this plugin has struggled a bit with changes to Newspapers.com itself). I have left some locations in for certain newspapers in which there is no indication of the location of the work in the title (e.g. The Times Herald).
      • Los Angeles Daily News?
        • Fixed.
    • Removed the ISSNs, most of which were added by ProveIt.
      • Still seem to be present in some cases? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • Fixed.
  • What makes Mixmag a high-quality reliable source? RabbitEars?
  • How could one access FN 130?
    • I was sent it privately by User:Andrew Jameson in 2022. Turns out it's also on the City of Detroit website. Fixed this.
  • FNs181 and 182 don't match in formatting. Ditto 192 and 193
    • Fixed 192/193. Unsure what the issue is on 181/182.
      • Now 182/183 - why a www. in one case but not the other? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • Fixed. (These are now 183 and 184) Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in your approach to wikilinking of publication titles
    • Tried to fix them to be links on first mention/use. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There appear to be a number of books (eg [2]) and journal articles (eg [3]) that aren't included here - what was your approach to sourcing? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • You've been tricked, Nikkimaria! Putting this here in bold because this will trip up non-topic reviewers: References to WWJ-TV in material prior to 1995 are actually in reference to WDIV-TV, which was the original WWJ-TV until 1978. Both of the links you provide are talking about that station, not the one at FAC. In the process of writing this article, I had to fix a Commons category that contained 1970s material mentioning channel 4 (not 62) and write WorldCat to fix an error that commingled channel 4 and 62 items in the same OCLC entry. This sort of thing is why we discourage linking to redirects among call sign-titled pages, for instance. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:03, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      This is also not without some precedent in the topic field... it's not common, but it's also not a terribly unique situation. There exist two stations that have used the WHAM-TV call sign: WROC-TV from 1949 to 1956, and the current WHAM-TV from 2005 onward. Similarly, there are two WSYR-TVs: WSTM-TV from 1950 to 1980; and the current WSYR-TV from from 2005 onward. In both cases (and such was the case with the two WWJ-TVs being derived from WWJ radio), the calls were applied from WHAM radio and WSYR radio. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 16:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • To respond to the second piece of this, the sourcing mix for most of my articles is primarily newspapers and trade journals. This station is unique in that it requires an additional set of publications, primarily from the Black community (see Jet and Black Enterprise which this article has), and its cultural influence has resulted in secondary source coverage not typical for US broadcast stations. Academic journal articles like the one from The Velvet Light Trap that is included are an utter rarity in this field. In another FA (WBPX-TV), I was lucky to find a book with in-depth coverage of part of its history. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:09, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ping to Nikkimaria as every outstanding item should be addressed now. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:28, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Second ping to Nikkimaria in re: access dates and Mixmag. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:18, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Given that Mixmag hasn't been discussed as far as we can tell, are there other factors that support its reliability? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:31, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        The magazine has existed in print since 1983 and has an editor and editorial board. In 2020, it had editorial teams in 16 cities worldwide ([4]).
        • The publication appears to have a fairly hefty history [5]. It appears to be a reliable source in this music topic area.
        • The author, Cameron Holbrook, was an editorial intern for Mixmag at the time.
        I don't know what more I can say other than that the publication appears to be quite well-respected in its house/club music niche and meets other basic editorial standards, and the article is not UGC. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Courtesy reminder to @Nikkimaria on this last item. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:09, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Okay, that's fine. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:52, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        @Nikkimaria: Any plans to continue this source review with spotchecks? Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        No - spotchecks are typically only required for new nominators, I just flag it in case the coordinators want to request them. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Good to know. Thanks. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Generalissima edit

I aim to make comments over the next few days. - Generalissima (talk) 03:39, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General thoughts

I would like to say that this is an exceptionally well-written article. The prose is really engaging and it feels like reading a professional work about the station. I have seen that a source review has been done, and that you have made significant improvements from the reviewers on bits of prose that was otherwise cumbersome, so I have just a tiny little bit still to cover!

  • "testified before the United States Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Communications..."
    • Do we need to specify United States here? This massive proper-name blue link disrupts the flow of the section. Wouldn't "Senate Commerce Subcommitee on Communications" be better?
  • "In 2021, Bruiser Brigade, a Detroit hip-hop collective led by Danny Brown, released an album titled TV62, a direct reference to WGPR, with the station's historic butterfly logo featured on the cover."
    • Due to the large number of short segments separated by commas, this sentence was a little confusing to read at first glance, although I don't necessarily know how to resolve it.
      • @Generalissima: Split this into two sentences at "TV62" with some accompanying word tweaks. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:31, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Having read through it several times, I cannot find any other mistakes - previous reviewers have been quite thorough! Great job so far, you two. Generalissima (talk) 09:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to "Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Communications". @Sammi Brie, any thoughts on the Bruiser Brigade sentence? Maybe it should be rephrased? Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 15:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome, thank you for the changes. :3 Generalissima (talk) 17:51, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment edit

The nomination is coming up on eight weeks old. Unless this nomination makes significant further progress towards a consensus to promote over the next few days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 03:00, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to finish my review within the next couple hours and expect to support! Apologies for taking so long. Generalissima (talk) 17:59, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Generalissima, any update on the review? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 13:48, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@David Fuchs It looks like she just completed it. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:53, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/WWJ-TV/archive1&oldid=1185949901"