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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
|
|
| Reviewing |
|
|
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Adog (talk · contribs) 05:19, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
|
Three explanations for another one. To prevent the GAN backlog from going into the red, the Orlando, Florida market is familiar to me, and to keep the streak along with the familiar television stations article reviews I have already completed. I might review another one, depending on the situation. If you get tired of my reviews, feel free to tell me off after this one, haha. This review will be done either Sunday, August 20 or Monday, August 21. Adog (Talk・Cont) 05:19, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The suggestions for prose are as follows:
WFTV (channel 9) is a television station affiliated with ABC in Orlando, Florida, United States.
It was originally ...
However, the same year the station went on air ...
Under a court order, Mid-Florida ceded operational control of WFTV in 1969 to Channel Nine of Orlando, Inc., which was a consortium of the five companies vying for the full-time broadcast license.In this instance, "which was" could be omitted.
Many of their 67 shareholders became millionaires when SFN Companies purchased WFTV in 1984 to expand into the broadcasting industry.
Although WFTV has faced renewed ratings competition since 2000, it continues to lead ratings in the Orlando–Daytona Beach market.
Permitting and construction
Throughout 1952 ...
... seven groups were seeking three channels ...
three-channel 9for clarity on application and not number of stations?
... believing the FCC to have overemphasized positives of WLOF's applicationPossible missing word "the" before "positives".
WLOF-TV began broadcasting on February 1, 1958, as the second station in Orlando itself.I would omit "itself" here.
Ex parte influence scandal
As WLOF-TV was getting on the air, a scandal exploded into view involving the FCC's decisions in several contested television station cases.I would move the modifier "exploded into view" to the end of the sentence for better reading.
The resulting congressional investigation uncovered other cases of ex parte communications between ..."cases of" may be redundant here.
Among the proceedings, the committee investigated channel 9 in Orlandoas the extra words compound the former.
Stephen J. Angland, investigator for the committee ...Possible missing word "the" before "investigator".
... the FCC showed openness to this request in February 1959 and announced it would do so in March pending the appeals court proceedingscould use a comma after "March".
He also recommended that Mid-Florida be ...with "suggested".
... the FCC filed a report with the Court of Appeals noting that the grant should be reconsidered though there was no wrongdoing by Mid-Florida officials because they were not aware of what Dial had done ..."not aware" to "unaware"?
Rehearing, new applicants, and interim operator
... claiming that the commission could not reverse some of the findings in the 1961 Cunningham report concerning credibility of witnessesPossible missing word "the" before "credibility".
... or possibly be reopened for new applicants for the channelI would omit "be" here as extra word.
The suggestion of reopening the channel 9 file was taken up by the FCC's Broadcast Bureau, which urged the commission to take new applications, though commission members were said to be unenthusiastic.I would consider breaking this sentence into two for better emphasis and create a less-lengthy statement, likely at "... new applications. However, commission members ..."
not to befor better modifier usage?
... the court agreed with the Broadcast Bureau and with the losing applicant that the record was stale.I would omit the second "with" as redundant.
In March 1965, the case was returned to the FCC for a third time, this time with orders ..."this time" may be redundant here.
Though the Murrells filed with their new company, in September, ...I would omit the first comma before "in" for better flow.
... the FCC designated the case for a full comparative hearing of the applicants' qualifications"applicant's" instead of "applicants'"?
... after Orange Nine's exit, Comint had joined the consortium"had" may be redundant here.
Channel 9 case in the 1970s: Minority ownership and Martin Segal
The initial decision was appealed ...It might be worth to note who did the appeal here.
... he had developed paraplegia?
The ruling pertaining to minority ownership ..."on" could replace "pertaining to" here for simplicity.
By this time, the case was a substantial source of paper records and attorneys' fees"By this time" may be redundant here.
The collapse had a substantial impact on ratings for the three local stations: unaffected WESH took the lead in news ...Comma before "WESH"?
Settlement and sale to SFN
That October, the five companies filed the outlines of a settlement agreement between them which would see the station ..."which would" to simply "to".
... while the United Church of Christ was reimbursed for nearly $35,000 in legal feesit might be important to note who reimbursed them for their legal fees because of the section's length. Readers might need a refresher.
After the settlement was approved, ...as with the above comment.
... James Robinson of Comint estimated that he had fielded 30 inquiries as to purchasing the station."as to" to "about"?
Cox ownership
... which had been criticized for purchasing the station in the first place: ...it might be important to know who criticized them here.
Though Ocala and Marion County are drawn into the Orlando market, in this area WFTV's signal overlaps with WCJB-TV of Gainesvilleit might read better to put "in the area" at the end of the sentence.
Several efforts were made to improve the situation; ...might be worth to know who made efforts here. Probably the station but I am skimming.
Even though the newscasts were facing ratings difficulties ..."ratings" to "rating"?
Alrightly, in terms of skim-throughs it was pretty solid. I will complete the rest of the read-through tonight or in the morning. Adog (Talk・Cont) 06:19, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WORZ immediately appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, ...I would remove "immediately" here as not needed.
In the wake of that order and in lieu of appealing ...?
A year later, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals ...this passage entails.
... which at the time was 25 percent Blackclarification may be needed here on what aspect 25 percent of the demographic entails. Did the population of broadcast media (in the Orlando market) consist of 25 percent of Black Americans?
A new transmitting tower at Bithlo had been proposed since 1966 as a joint venture with WDBO-TV, this was activated in 1970, replacing the mast at its Orlo Vista site.Starting with "this", it should be a new sentence.
... third-place WFTV remained in third"third-place" may be redundant here as the latter states "remained".
... in April 1997.[133] under a news share ...Capitalization here?
... WFTV was the first Orlando station to broadcast a digital signal, beginning in April 2001,[151] WFTV ended programming ...Might be an instance where WFTV should be the start of another sentence. If so, punctuation here.
Alright, the full-read through was also good. I want to re-read the court case history a bit again. The former half looked fantastic and on point. The latter half I might suggest some trimming. Other than that, the content was informational and insightful. I will do spotchecks as well soon. Adog (Talk・Cont) 17:09, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: Besides the above-noted spot check, good, good. Fixes good, and explanations of rejection are good per reason and policy/guideline. So far, I would make sure to use double quotes where needed, possibly using {{" '}} and/or {{' "}} temps for quotes within a quote; as there are several instances in the prose. Spotchecks were mostly good. Otherwise, I think the latter section was good. I do not think you could reduce it much further without key parts missing for context. After these spot checks are changed, I think we are good to pass! :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 23:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article is well written with suggestions taken care of. Sammi Brie is on top of things as always. The manual of style is followed for TV stations. The reference layout is looking good with only minor fixes to be had. The article cites from a variety of reliable sources, no doubts there. Besides a few spot checks, there were no major or outstanding issues in the original research. Earwig looks good here against plagiarism/copyright/close paraphrasing. I would change the statement "operate under the name Terrier Media", if at all, not a major issue. Adog (Talk・Cont) 23:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article is broad in scope covering many aspects of the TV station's inception and ownership dealings. The article is well versed in its focus, there is attention to lots of detail here that is necessary for ongoing paragraphs. In terms of neutrality, as is the case with any type of political/court cases, are usually iffy. However, I think the editor here did a very well good job of balancing views. I think the arguments were well presented, and everyone (in the past) got a voice here, and are exceptional for due weight. Adog (Talk・Cont) 23:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The one image is good. Nothing much or more to say, it is the logo. The article is stable, no active or ongoing edit conflicts. Adog (Talk・Cont) 06:19, 21 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.
