Talk:KMEX-DT/GA1

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Lee Vilenski in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 22:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Reply


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

edit

Prose

edit

Lede

edit
  • You might gather I did not write much of the lead... It's been my experience that sometimes leads get, ahem, changed. The channels do belong on line 1, see below. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 20:07, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
  •   Done (sports might be undue to put in the lead but not news)

General

edit
  • Very much so. You will also see at times in US media the use of channel number as metonymy for the station: "Oh, there's a new show on Channel 7..." Even some of the Spanish-language sources do this if you look at some of the titles that have "Canal 34" in them. US television is not the UK (WP:TVS did not have BBC One in its scope until recently) at all.
  • I use "channel XX" to reduce the number of times I have to recite the call letters in the article to refer to the station.
  • For some stations, their channel number is very relevant because historically, television stations on channels 14 and above had a unique set of challenges. See UHF television broadcasting. I have some 30 DYKs (and now a GA, WNAO-TV) on stations in the 1950s that went kaput because of such challenges.
  •   Done
  •   Done
  •   Done
  •   Done
  •   Done
  •   Done
  • That's because the section focuses on local sports. The station would have had sports presenters for the news (including, you guessed it, Villanueva) and national sports broadcasts from the network, so this is not the disconnect it may seem.
  • It doesn't, but it also is bog-standard. You will find that exact sentence in thousands of these pages.

Review meta comments

edit
  • @Lee Vilenski: I've made many of the suggested changes. Some of these are topic-level issues (let's just say with each GA I do, I end up with some non-notable anchor at prod or AfD and some sort of formatting change suggestion to the field). The external link issue requires a bit more care, and I've linked some prior precedent on that topic. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 20:07, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
I've made a couple changes to the read to make it easier for someone not familiar with the subject. Passing. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:40, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply