Talk:KXXV/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

Nominator: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 16:58, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 19:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

• Copyvio check: No non-zero matches found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector.

• Logo image: suitable FUR is in place.

Sources

• Hoover, Carl (January 5, 2019) - article is paywalled, so should be marked as such.
• Deitsch, Richard (August 26, 2019) - article is paywalled, so should be marked as such.
• Spot check on "Within weeks of each other in 1977, Central Texas Broadcasting Company, formed by Waco businessman Robert A. Mann, and Business Communications Inc. of Fort Worth applied to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for Waco's channel 25" - no issues
• Spot check on " hearings concluded a year later" - no issues
• Spot check on "In November 1981, FCC administrative law judge Edward Kuhlmann issued an initial decision favoring Blake-Potash. However, the other three applicants lodged appeals with the commission's review board. Kuhlmann found all four applicants to be flawed in some form due to improprieties in their business dealings" - my reading of the source is that it was the "key personnel" rather than the companies themselves that were found to have been involved in "improprieties", and I think there is a difference.
  • Added "owners'" to clarify.
• Spot check on "Blake-Potash appealed this decision to the full FCC, calling Mann an "artful dodger"" - no issues.
• Spot check on "One consequence of the sale was that KXXV lost the Telemundo affiliation to KWTX" - no issues.
• Spot check on "later of Fox & Friends, known as Edye Grant at KXXV" - "later of Fox & Friends" not verified by source.
  • Specifically changed to conform with what should be the standard, where "later of" and "now at" annotations go in the person's article. Fixes to here: Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
• Spot check on "Mann had selected a different call sign: KXXV-TV, from the Roman numeral for 25" - no issues
• Spot check on "Bad weather delayed the launch of the new station" - no issues
• Spot check on "it did not continue employing five of the station's senior executives, including the general manager" - no issues. Maybe make the statement a bit more diret, though? (e.g. "dismissed five of the station's senior executives.."
  • Rephrased.
• Sources all seem appropriate.

General comments

• Add non-breaking spaces between numbers and "million"
• "At the time, the market only had two local network affiliates, the largest in the United States" (in History); "without three network-affiliated TV stations" (in Lead). I think the statement in History is slightly incomplete as it stands. Maybe spmething like "the market was the largest in the United States to have only two local network affiliates2? For the lead, how about "without at least three.. " (I'm assuming that there are some with more than three)
  • Tried to reword.
• "NBC programs were unavailable in the Waco area for months while construction took place on the new station, delayed by weather. Bad weather delayed the launch of the new station" - I might be missing something about why lack of NBC programmes can be deistinguished from general delays to the launch, but can't these two sentences be combined?
  • No kidding. What a kludge. Reworded.
• "The WB" - I note your response at Talk:KUVI-DT/GA1.
• "guy wires" could maybe be wiklinked to Guy-wire

@BennyOnTheLoose: Final revisions. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Sammi Brie. Thank you. I'm satisfied that the article meets the GA criteria, so I'm passing it. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:58, 28 August 2024 (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.