Talk:KTRV-TV/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

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

Reviewer: Vaticidalprophet (talk · contribs) 19:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Will start review soon. Vaticidalprophet 19:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

As you know, I tend to think about these articles from the perspective that readers are more interested in their broadcasting history than in their infrastructure or in the people who ran them, though those are of course also important. I also (as I mentioned) looked through the sources around the same time I picked it up, though am doing so again now. The article is short -- past my GAN minimum, but there's still a fair amount of source detail that seems due to expand it with.

• One thing not mentioned in the article at all, but focused on heavily by sourcing, is that KTRV in its early days was an independent in an abnormally small market for one (maybe the smallest?). This seems really due to mention. (The article currently calls it a "typical independent station", which makes sense in its context but could be misinterpreted in the exact opposite way.) Things like the "smallest" claim would need less-local sourcing that may or may not exist, but the general focus on KTRV's unusual status in this respect should be in the article.
  • That "smallest" claim would require a lot of legwork, but I made it "one of the smallest". That seems to be true. KTRV was successful enough to inspire at least one other small-market indie, something I only discovered recently and can add.
• Per the Statesman, Nov 1: Channel 12 was the first new station that met its on-air deadline in about five years, with additional context on what this means for the station. If it's true -- is it true? for what geographic area? -- should it be mentioned?
  • This is an impossible claim to prove.
• The Statesman, Oct 18 has more detail on programming in that early era that seems worth incorporating, including a more contextualized sense of what independent programming was like than what the article gives (which just refers to "typical" programming with a few decontextualized examples).
  • Done. Also added some material here that because of the publication it was in would not have turned up in my source search.
• From looking at newspapers.com on the 20th, it seems Canyon Forum lasted until at least 1990? Is this right?
  • Maybe 1987? But it doesn't come up anywhere in the media except TV listings printed in Twin Falls.
• I get the sourcing restriction, but if we're mentioning the 4:30pm newscast, "when it started" seems more due than "when it ended".
  • Yeah, this is a hard one to figure up.
• Idaho is rapidly-growing, and was during the late 2000s when some of the newscast discussions are from. The Statesman, Apr 17 talks about starting a morning newscast to try capture that growth. Idaho Business Review goes into a fair bit of detail about what that growth meant/didn't mean for local stations that seems worth discussing, as well as KTRV's specific relationship with other stations at that time.
  • Added a little more here.
• You mentioned once that the circumstances under which KTRV was dropped by Fox were unusual, but I'm not seeing that clearly from the article. Is there some way to contextualize this?
  • Fox doesn't go dropping affiliates over retrans fees often. They did it here with two stations (the other was WTVW in Indiana), and it caused a stir.
• NextTV, like the IBR, discusses KTRV's place in the local market a fair bit more than the article does in ways that are relevant to it. The article doesn't mention KTVB at all; the sources compare them extensively.
  • Added some of this.
• Did they actually hire six newscasters or not? "Would be" is ambiguous, and I'm not super clear from the source. It kind of implies yes, though?
  • No, because they backtracked on the whole darn thing, as the next paragraph.
• Could we give some context on Ion/MyNetworkTV/MeTV's usual programming? None of them are especially huge networks, and double-checking our article and some other sources I had a vaguely inaccurate impression of what Ion is (I thought of them as still basically a glorified 24/7 infomercial lineup).
  • MyNetworkTV is not even a network with original programs now and hasn't been in a long time. It's just a delivery service for syndicated reruns.
• There's a little bit of proseline, which is at its most prominent by far in "Ion affiliation and sale". While I expect the article to expand, that amount of proseline in a short article is a problem for properly contextualizing it. I'll check back on this later, but that section as a whole is a bit of a decontextualized series of dates at the moment. I understand that it's trickier to source more recent sections of these articles than earlier ones, and I'll look back on it once we have a more expanded article overall. (I wonder if we could consolidate the second and third subsections?)
  • Did a bit of rewording.

This is a fair number of content notes -- sorry about that. The sources on this were a really interesting read, and I'd like to see more of that in the article. Vaticidalprophet 02:57, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

• @Vaticidalprophet: Responded to many issues. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

  It's looking good -- I very much understand the sourcing issues, so many of these were more queries than anything. Reading back over the article, I notice we now have a long paragraph for the third para in "Construction", with a natural breakpoint at "KTRV was immediately successful". Aside from that, I think this will be ready to pass soon. Vaticidalprophet 06:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

  Done. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

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.