This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
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
Been browsing the other 'lists of television stations in {state}'.
I think we may have a long term problem here, because of several factors:
Digital television is a reality. There should probably now be a way to distinguish between analog and digital stations. Current channel lists on Wikipedia (List_of_television_stations_in_California) usually just start at 2 (NTSC analog, VHF) and go up to 69 (NTSC analog, UHF), up in order numerically.
As the 'See also' link at the bottom of the Wisconsin page illustrates, there are a LOT of television stations registered in the state. Detail at that level changes regularly, and many people may not care about the low power religious stations. So where is the line drawn? Nationally affiliated networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, UPN, WB, PBS, Univision, etc.), with select independants? All stations? Maintaining all fifty states' 'on air' networks could be a full time job by itself.
Stations could be broken up by market, or simply alphabetically by transmitter location. The former allows easier searching, the latter allows a more comprehensive list and prevents editing wars over which station is in which market - although Nielsen does define markets explicitly, I believe. I suspect ordering by channel lowest to highest is rather arbitrary and will only be useful to someone who is already tuned to a channel in a region and wants to know what affiliation it has.
How should analog and digital television be separated? Should they be in completely separate lists - separate pages?
Would a table format be appropriate for what is being attempted here?
One thing is certain, the current lists on Wikipedia do not acknowledge digital telvision at all. However, I'm not sure how best to attack this.
Skybunny 00:44, 21 Oct 2003 (UTC)
As far as Digital goes, I put a new section at the bottom of List of television stations in Minnesota, but then we also have virtual channel numbering to worry about (and besides, I was only able to do the Twin Cities market). Note, however, that digital channels are generally only broadcast on UHF 15-50.. Tables would be nice, but they are a real bitch to edit. I think a lot of pages with tables on them don't get edited for that reason.. —Mulad 22:42, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)
"This is a list of broadcast television stations serving cities in the U.S. state of Wisconsin."[edit]
Not true. This is a list of television stations BASED IN cities in the U.S. state of Wisconsin.
There are plenty of other stations located OUTSIDE the state of Wisconsin, which serve cities in the state of Wisconsin. For example, the primary stations serving the city of Hudson, WI, are the stations based in Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN. (Conversely, there are many cities in southeast Minnesota which get their primary television service form the stations in La Crosse, WI.)
Either the title of this page (and of the similar pages for every state in the nation) needs to change to reflect that these are the stations based in the state, but not necessarily the source of the signals in the state--or the lists need to be updated to reflect the reality of intrastate television signal transmission.
I have just modified one external link on List of television stations in Wisconsin. 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).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
