WikiProject iconRadio Stations Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Radio Stations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of radio stations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Dravecky

I just wanted to take a moment to remember our good friend and a driving force behind this project, and others, Dravecky. We lost him 4 years ago today, April 23.

An admin, he was honored with 3 good articles and 145 DYKs, plus he had 104,715 edits to his name, including one (his last) the morning he passed. Dravecky was a friend to all, on and off Wikipedia. A SciFi fan above all else. He helped do the behind the scenes stuff (along with his longtime girlfriend Robyn) for FenCon, WhoFest, among many others and met many of his favorite actors and actresses. He loved his University of Alabama Crimson Tide football.

I think I can speak for everyone when I say he is still missed by all here. Roll Tide, Dravecky. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 15:39 on April 23, 2020 (UTC) • #StayAtHome

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KBQS-LP

Currently before us is an AfD, but it's not your usual AfD. There are a SLEW of hoax edits and it's made it very hard to figure out what end is up in this one. So, please read through it all, consider all the sides and facts, and go from there. It has been relisted (as of today), so we have plenty of time to put our opinions/!votes out on this one. - NeutralhomerTalk • 02:22 on February 28, 2021 (UTC)

Pictures of radio dials in articles

I don't want to delete these without any explanation...but I don't understand the spread of 'radio dial' images in articles such as WNCI and KMJM-FM, where someone posts an image of the screen of their HD Radio playing a certain station as 'proof' of a station's existence, as if the article, its text, and links to the station's website aren't enough proof of its existence. Looking at the KMJM example, we have a full picture of a radio, including the editor's hand, as if they're a hostage giving a "proof of life" that they actually received that station.

We can't 'hear' these pictures though. They take up space, are often ugly, and give no information to the reader, who likely will not share that radio tuner. Should they be in articles, or are they pointless decoration that waste precious WP:FAIRUSE slots? Please share your thoughts. Thank you. Nate (chatter) 04:53, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:IRELEV states images "must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. They are often an important illustrative aid to understanding." I don't see how a radio dial image aids in understanding the article and is anything but "decorative". I would favor removal. MB 18:08, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removing slogan parameter from Infobox radio station and Infobox television station

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was removed. PrimeBOT will be requested. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 03:32, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When I submitted redesign proposals for the WPRS/TVS infoboxes last year, a comment was made by MB about the |slogan= parameter and the fact that it had been removed from similar boxes as being too promotional (see here for the comment and links to similar discussions in other infoboxes).

IceWelder today removed the |slogan= parameter from ((Infobox television channel)), citing a similar rationale. Is it time to proceed to do the same for ((Infobox radio station))/((Infobox television station)) (and other similar templates)? If consensus leans yes, I can request PrimeBOT to run and remove the field from all of the transclusions automatically; given the number of pages affected, this is going to be a necessity.

As a note, usage of |slogan= was in 40% of transclusions of Infobox television channel, 47.6% of transclusions of Infobox television station, and 58% of transclusions of Infobox radio station. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 23:18, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support About 20% of my reverts on the cable network pages were about the slogans (fake slogans, old slogans, 20 slogans packed onto the template), so yes...ready for them all to go. It's a hassle to keep up with them, and in many cases, TV stations either have so many slogans down to court show blocks, it's absurd, or they just don't have one and the field is a waste of bytes. And for radio, the same, or it's just so generic that it doesn't matter. Nate (chatter) 00:20, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We're still throwing around that Jimbo quote about "the sum of all human knowledge" (see WP:PRIME and WP:6M, just to scratch the surface). "...old slogans, 20 slogans packed onto the template" suggests our intention is to only feature what the current owner is currently pushing. Not only is this promotional in nature, it's incompatible with "the sum of all human knowledge". From what I see, our coverage of magazines, newspapers, radio stations and television stations is already far too heavily weighed towards resembling social media fodder for whoever happens to own that outlet today. There are numerous editors dedicated to pushing our content in that direction and refusing to discuss any objections to their work, even when those discussions wind up at ANI (mostly limited to television station articles, but it's subtly crept into these articles as well). RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 15:43, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Still Support. In the past year, I removed if from a couple more minor templates (law firm, bus operator if I recall) with no complaints. MB 01:07, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The issue is that these slogans are never printed in the neutral press. They're always found through advertisements and airchecks that do not meet our sourcing guidelines, and are often of interest to only a slight few. And in the intervening years (despite their absolutely non-existent COPYVIO policies), Wikia/Fandom has taken up the slack in writing about everything regarding TV/radio stations, leaving us to do the basics. Being the 'sum of human knowledge' is a worthy goal...but I doubt even the librarians of Alexandria would need us to know that "WGN-TV had a different jingle and slogan to promote their summer schedule every years in the 80s, and Laverne & Shirley aired in 12 different timeslots through 1994". Nate (chatter) 02:30, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, per WP:PRIMARYCARE, something like a slogan that's sourced to a station website would be acceptable for citing what a business says about itself. It's not acceptable for notability, but it still can meet sourcing guidelines. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 12:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as per the reasons given above. The station's |branding= (or name) is less subject to frequent changes. WHTZ has had the branding Z-100 for decades. --DrChuck68 (talk) 12:29, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose, I understand the concern and for TV stations I agree with the removal, but for radio I'll admit a fondness for seeing slogans, which don't seem to change too often (except along with other changes in branding and even callsigns). Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 13:27, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd push back a little at the idea that logos are more recognizable than slogans. Yes, digital radio and the Web make it more likely that people will see a station logo now than a few decades ago where you'd most frequently see them on bumperstickers or billboards, but radio's still an audio medium and slogans are a big part of start of a station's identity. —— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcr25 (talkcontribs) 12:37, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The field is superfluous and usually clogged with lots of slogans (especially on the TV side, where some articles will list three or four because editors just add them all in) that it doesn't not sound purely advertorial at times. Nathan Obral • he/him • tc • 06:00, 9 September 2021 (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.

Reopen: For radio stations

Apologizes for reopening this, I was on vacation, so I was unaware of this discussion. Anyway, we have plenty of slogan fields over in WP:WPRS (radio stations) that are currently being used. I can't speak for the TV side of things, but radio stations only have one slogan like "The Hit Music Station" or "Today's Hot New Country". Rarely, if ever, do they have two. I've looked at the discussion and it seems like it's kinda lopsided in TV's favor, but not really radio's.

As I have stated, the slogan field is currently being used in almost all radio station pages. Calling it "deprecated" and "superfluous" (on the radio side) seems a bit wrong. - NeutralhomerTalk • 22:45, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No one is saying it is not used in a lot of radio station articles. It has been removed from many other templates because of its promotional nature. Something said by a station about itself to be memorable and attract listeners should not be given a prominent place in the infobox. MB 23:21, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MB: Same could be said about it's branding as well. That too could be considered "promotional", should we remove that? But we are specifically saying that it's "deprecated" and "superfluous" (mostly on the TV side) when it's not on the radio side. I ask that we look specifically at the radio side, where it is used quite often, if not across the board, and reconsider...on the radio side only. I believe the decision was/has been made on the TV side already and I can't speak for that as I don't participate in TVS. - NeutralhomerTalk • 23:28, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whether to remove it is not based on the number of uses. The consensus was that it should be removed from all media articles just like it has already been removed from many other infoboxes. No one has proposed removing branding at this time, but that is not an argument to keep slogan. MB 23:47, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MB: I think you missed my point on the branding. :) The discussion was lopsided, almost all about TV. Everyone saying it was "deprecated" and "superfluous", this is not true. It's an incorrect (and false) reason. Just because it's not used on other infoboxes, doesn't mean it's not used here. To use the old adage, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". This ain't broke. - NeutralhomerTalk • 23:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You keep going back to the fact that it is used here frequently. That is not in dispute. As I already said, that is irrelevant. The reason it is being removed throughout the encyclopedia is due to its promotional nature. It's no longer used in other infoboxes and it shouldn't be used in this one either, for the same reasons. MB 00:06, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Promotional" is a pretty slippery slope here; the same could be said of logos, branding, and other elements that identify a station and are encyclopedic. Neutralhomer is right that the complaints in the above discussion about slogans seemed to be focused mostly (only?) on television stations. There was no engagement on points about radio stations' slogans. And it's not accurate to say that such things aren't used in other infoboxes. Look at the motto field in ((Infobox newspaper)). —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 00:16, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean slogan/motto isn't used in ANY other infoboxes - I was talking about the ones where it has been removed, especially the commonly used ones like ((infobox company)) and ((organization)) (which together are used in around 100k articles).— Preceding unsigned comment added by MB (talkcontribs)
@MB: Yeah, it's no longer used, because the entire field was removed from the infobox. That's the only reason it's "no longer used". On thousands of radio station pages, the field remains ready and waiting to be used.
The irrelevancy of something is one's personal opinion. One's personal opinion is meaningless when it comes to Wikipedia as a whole. I've seen one discussion...one. One very lopsided discussion. As Carter said above, there was zero engagement on anything radio in that discussion. To call that discussion an encyclopedia-wide disccusion is a little crazy. That discussion wouldn't have consensus across the entire community. I'm not going to change my opinion on this one. - NeutralhomerTalk • 00:29, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There have been many discussions about removing slogans from infoboxes and the consensus is always that they are promotional. Is anyone going to give any reasons why slogans belong in radio station infoboxes and why the arguments used elsewhere don't apply to radio stations. MB 01:10, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looking over the prior discussions about removing slogans, it seems the consensus was more silence than actual discussion. The only arguments I'm seeing are that they are "promotional" and "why are we letting a marketing department have space in an infobox" (paraphrasing), as well as "they change too often" (again paraphrasing). Yes, radio slogans are promotional in the sense that they are designed to help people remember the station, not just so that they tune in to a specific dial position when they want a specific type of programming but also so that when they are filling out an Arbitron listening diary the station gets credit for the quarter hour. This last one is the reason radio station slogans have tended to be pretty static, usually changing only when there's a major format change. Also, as I noted above as an audio-based medium a station's slogan may well be more recognizable to the listener than a station logo or other visual branding. Digital radio and the web have changed that some (as have the way ratings are compiled), but that doesn't mean station slogans aren't valuable information that should be included. It's part of a station's identity, history, and presence ... all of which are things that a reader reasonably would expect to find on a page or in an infobox. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 01:29, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Should I have PrimeBOT hold on removing the data from the radio station pages, @MB/@Tcr25/@Neutralhomer? Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 02:23, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: At least across my watchlist, PrimeBot has already populated the change. Unless you are meaning the removal of the field from all pages, then yes, I would hold. - NeutralhomerTalk • 02:26, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I mean. I've told Primefac to hold and I'll advise once we work through this. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 02:40, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: I read that in two ways. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 02:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No harm in waiting for a bit to see if there is enough to change the outcome. MB 02:42, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MB: I agree. Give it time, talk it out, go from there. - NeutralhomerTalk • 02:51, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's a shame that, once again, failure to engage on the question is seen as support for removal of radio station slogans. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 18:50, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tcr25:Yup, basically. I expected this. Total crickets. It doesn't surprise me, it disappoints me. - NeutralhomerTalk • 19:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Project tagging

Would there be any objection to me temporarily adding a category to transclusions of ((Infobox radio station))? This would be used to support tagging pages that contain these templates into this project using Wikipedia:WikiProjectTagger. This would assist in identifying pages that need assistance and also those pages that might be tagged as in WikiProject Radio but not WPRS (I've seen a few). Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 00:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sammi Brie: So, it would make sure everything was tagged as WPRS and not WP:Radio? Just making sure I'm understanding. - NeutralhomerTalk • 01:08, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It'd just add the WPRS tag to it if it didn't have it already. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 01:54, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: OK, that's how I understood that. I support this. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 02:39, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: That sounds helpful. Thanks! —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 11:57, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]