Talk:WCTV

A Georgia station or a Florida station?

I have to question whether to include the CBS Georgia template here. Even though WCTV is licensed to Thomasville, for all intents and purposes it's a Tallahassee station. From what I remember in reading previous versions of their Web site, WCTV has NEVER had its main studio on the Georgia side of the market, so it has always considered itself a Tallahassee station.

In my book, WCTV is in the same category as a few other stations licensed in one state, but pretty much identify with another:

• WWOR-TV: Licensed in Secaucus, New Jersey since '83 and even has a studio there, but has always considered itself a New York station
• WPWR-TV: Licensed in Gary, Indiana, but considers itself a Chicago station
• WMYT-TV: Licensed in Rock Hill, but considers itself a Charlotte station (my hometown, so I know)
• WGTW-TV: Licensed in Burlington, New Jersey but considers itself a Philadelphia station
• KPDX-TV: Licensed in Vancouver, Washington but considers itself a Portland station
• XETV-TV: Licensed in Tijuana but considers itself a San Diego station
• WXIX-TV: Licensed in Newport, Kentucky, but considers itself a Cincinnati station

On that basis, I would argue that WCTV is a 100% Tallahassee station. Blueboy96 15:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

From the current News Director of WCTV: There was a time in WCTV's history that it had two fully-operational studios: one in Tallahassee, FL and one in Thomasville, GA. In the late 60s/early 70s the Thomasville studio was downsized and all production was then moved to the Florida studio. The station still operates news bureaus in Thomasville, GA and Valdosta, GA.

Fair use rationale for Image:WCTVFLA.PNG

Image:WCTVFLA.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Adding unreferenced entries of former employees to lists containing BLP material

Hello, Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to the 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:

1. WP:NOT tells us, Wikipedia is "not an indiscriminate collection of information." As that section describes, just because something is true, doesn't necessarily mean the info belongs in Wikipedia.
2. As per WP:V, we cannot include information in Wikipedia that is not verifiable and sourced.
3. WP:Source list tells us that lists included within articles (including people's names) are subject to the same need for references as any other information in the article.
4. Per WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.

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. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 02:52, 9 April 2011 (UTC)