![]() | KSAZ-TV has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: March 16, 2022. (Reviewed version). |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the KSAZ-TV article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | It is requested that an imageorphotographofKSAZ-TVbeincluded in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search ToolorOpenverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. | Upload |
![]() | A fact from KSAZ-TV appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 April 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Should we just replace the Fox 10 logo now with the one for Monday? We did that with the Daystar swap last weekend. -TrackerTV 20:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone if those are the REAL job titles for sports and weather? I have watched FOX 10 for years and only heard references a couples times as Jude for being sports director and Dave Munsey as the Chief Weather Authority. Does anyone know? please let me know.
Thank you.
Jude is the Sports Director. Dave is the main weather presenter but, lacks any real weather knowledge or chops. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.110.57.130 (talk) 02:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hello, Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to a list of former 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:
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. 70.48.216.22 (talk) 00:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on KSAZ-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:34, 30 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on KSAZ-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:06, 4 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
GA toolbox |
---|
|
Reviewing |
|
Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 13:48, 8 March 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 (talk • contribs)
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.
The result was: promotedbyZ1720 (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
)
Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie (talk). Self-nominated at 16:42, 16 March 2022 (UTC).Reply
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall: AryKun (talk) 08:00, 19 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Promoted ALT0 to Prep 5. Z1720 (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)Reply