This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about
television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the
style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Tampa Bay, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Tampa BayWikipedia:WikiProject Tampa BayTemplate:WikiProject Tampa BayTampa Bay articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
This unsourced list has been moved from the article. Per
WP:NLIST and
WP:Source list such lists should be sourced, and some notability established for each person, or the list deleted. Each person on this list needs to be sourced before being returned to the article. SilkTork *
YES! 17:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Lisa Remillard, reporter (2005-2008) Now at
KTNV in
Las Vegas as an anchor.
Matthew Schwartz, investigative reporter (2005-2008)
Walt Maciborski, 5pm anchor (2005-2009) Now at
KDAF-TV in
Dallas.
Linda Gialanella, weekend meteorologist/fill-in meteorologist (2003-2009)
James Zambroski, general assignment reporter (2007-2009)
Porcha Johnson, general assignment reporter (2008-2009)
Al Keck, weekday sports anchor/sports director (2001-2009)
I completely agree
Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to the lists of employees in articles. Including this type of material in articles does not abide by current consensus and its inclusion is strongly discouraged in our policies and guidelines. The rationales are as follows:
WP:NOT tells us, Wikipedia is "not an indiscriminate collection of information." As that section describes, just because something is true, doesn't necessarily mean the info belongs in Wikipedia.
As per
WP:V, we cannot include information in Wikipedia that is not verifiable and sourced.
WP:NLIST tells us that lists included within articles (including people's names) are subject to the same need for references as any other information in the article.
Per
WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.
If you look at articles about companies in general, you will not find mention of previous employees, except in those cases where the employee was particularly notable. Even then, the information is not presented just as a list of names, but is incorporated into the text itself (for example, when a company's article talks about the policies a previous CEO had, or when they mention the discovery/invention of a former engineer/researcher). If a preexisting article is already in the encyclopedia for the person you want to add to a list, it's generally regarded as sufficient to support their inclusion in list material in another article. cheers
Deconstructhis (
talk) 04:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Incident at the Bellweather Hotel in the early morning yesterday?
While packing our car preparing to check out of this hotel in the early morning we noted an impressive police presence in the lobby of the hotel. Hotel employees were hush, hush about disclosing any info. One man sat quietly on the ground out front. Fire and rescue vehicles were also present. One guest stated he had heard loud screams on the 7th floor and a large police presence there as well.
Did any news media pick up on this story???
98.192.95.12 (
talk) 10:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the
Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Oh, best believe I will review one of the sources I love to cite and read! I want to get this done today, August 28 29, since there is a hurricane coming. If not, I will be up at night to review! Stay tuned!
Adog (
Talk・
Cont) 21:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)reply
You know what time it is!
Prose
Lead
... it was sold to Scripps the following year after the former's purchase of ABC. to ... it was sold to Scripps the following year after the former purchased ABC.?
If you wish to reduce wording, "at the same time" could be simply "simultaneously".
History
... for a station which would have been called WTSS-TV, which was never built and deleted in 1971 Runs a bit awkward because of the "which"-es. I would replace the first "which" with "that".
As an ABC affiliate
... though no reason was given by the network ... could be written as ... the network gave no reason ...
News operation
... though the station was considering establishing one runs a bit awkward because of the passive voice and two -ing's here. Maybe ... though the station was contemplating the possibility of creating one?
In order to to to.
... this marked the first time ever WFTS won at 5:00, 5:30, 6:00 and 11:00 p.m. "ever" might be redundant here, as the emphasis is placed on "first time".
References
1, "RabbitEars.Info" to "RabbitEars"?
Alright, the read-through and skim-through was excellent! Just some suggestions, not much or any corrections here. Spot checks next.
Additional comments or concerns
"Family sold the station to Capital Cities Communications for more than $30 million.[15] The deal gave Capital Cities its first station in Florida and its first (and only) independent, as well as bringing the group to its then-maximum of seven stations.[15]" Because these statements are back-to-back the first instance of ref. 15 could be omitted.
Done
Ref. 21, was there a reason for "St. Petersburg, Florida" to be included in its location publication parameter as opposed to other references?
This used to be automatic for PressPass, but it since has broken. I've removed it across the board.
Spot check: For the sentence "That meant that the network would no longer have had a coverage gap between Tampa and Fort Myers, ..." I cannot verify the reach to Ft. Myers part in the source attached
here. Is there another newspaper article that explains channel 40's reach? The part I read, it only covered Sarasota (its base) and Manatee, but not Lee County where that city is located. Maybe it is in the source
in the following sentence?
Reworded heavily with new refs. It no longer makes this claim. It does explain why ABC needed WWSB with WTSP but not WFTS though.
I forget if there was an explanation for this in a past review, ref. 33 might need a Retrieval date.
Just was omitted. Fixed.
Spot check: I am not sure if
this source explains the sentence: "The primary reason was that the original channel 28 studios at I-4 and Columbus Drive were simply not large enough; the Himes Avenue facility project was only a plan when the switch was announced". There might be a missing source to match, but this article states channel 28's move to the Tampa facility along Himes (not mentioning Columbus) will not be affected by the loss of NFL programming.
Reworded here.
For the following sentence mentioning "28 Tampa Bay News", I know from the latter sources that is what it is titled, but in the source cited it does not explicitly state such. I would add the source from the next sentence after this one to this sentence to better aid readers in correlating these two references (that was a sentence full from me).
Added a new ref here. @
Adog:Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c) 00:24, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Awesome! I am gonna do a once over again. If anything is further, I will ping shortly.
Adog (
Talk・
Cont) 01:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Well written + verifiability
The article is well written, with no grammar or sentence structure issues. The article follows the general manual of style. The article cites a variety of reliable sources within its table of contents, and the reference layout is proper. The article has some spot checks to check out above, but no major issues.
Earwig turned out good, no outstanding issues regarding plagiarism, copyright, or close paraphrasing.
Adog (
Talk・
Cont) 23:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Broadness + focus + neutral
The article is broad in scope of the subject, with a fair and focused perspective on the overall station. The article is written in a neutral manner, giving fair points to all parties.
Adog (
Talk・
Cont) 22:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Images + stability
The article's logo image is relevant to the article's content. The paperwork is properly filed. The article is stable, with no active or ongoing edit conflicts. As a side note, the next time I am around
Ray Jay I can try to get another photo for this article if needed.
Adog (
Talk・
Cont) 22:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Adog: Please! That would be extremely helpful. First round of changes done; the lead was rewritten to be a bit more size-appropriate.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c) 22:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Sammi Brie: All done with the review. Only some minor problems to take a look at further. I will put that on my list the next time I am over there (it might not be high quality, but a quality nonetheless)! :D
Adog (
Talk・
Cont) 23:34, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.