Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Chasing New Jersey

< Template:Did you know nominations
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by Allen3 talk 00:33, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Closing as per request from nominator

DYK toolbox

Chasing New Jersey

edit
(
)

Created by ViperSnake151 (talk). Self nominated at 03:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC).

  • Excellent article, almost ready to go. You just need an inline citation for the description of the show as "tabloid-style" if we're to use that in the hook. The article only mentions the word 'tabloid' once, uncited, and your first five refs don't appear to use that word. Also, ref 5 goes to a 404 page. Gamaliel (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Many of the sources compared it to TMZ; isn't TMZ a tabloid? ViperSnake151  Talk  22:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
      • If it was just article text, I would agree, but there are strict DYK rules about citing the content of the hook. Gamaliel (talk) 14:58, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Pulling this one out of the prep area due to my concerns about the hook wording. The item that bothered me was "TMZ-like". I didn't know what TMZ is, and after reading this article and the TMZ article, I'm only slightly better informed; I don't think that "TMZ-like" is sufficiently widely understood to be used in the hook. Also, the statement about "New Jersey politicians" is too broad; it implies that a significant number of state-level politicians have this concern, when in fact it is a subset of the state's representative in Congress. The hook wording needs more work. --Orlady (talk) 14:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC) After examining the cited sources, I'm not convinced that the calls for revocation of the station's license can be described as being "for replacing its newscast" with this show. As I read it, the Senators and Representative objected to the newscast, and they don't like this new show either. --Orlady (talk) 15:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
  • That's not what the article says. It quotes him as saying: "rather than add much-needed New Jersey specific programming to their lineup, WWOR instead [chose] to supplant its nightly news segment with a show referred to in news reports as ‘like TMZ'.'" --Orlady (talk) 04:09, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Anything happening here? --PFHLai (talk) 03:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
  • My reading of the article and the sources leads me to understand that the station's news coverage was a target of severe criticism before they introduced this show. In that context, the current criticism is largely a continuation of the ongoing criticism of the station (which was apparently criticized for not having enough news programming and for not covering New Jersey in the news programming it did have). Furthermore, it appears to me that the current criticism is not about this show, but rather is about the station's cancellation of its previous new show and its decision to fire the news staff. It is a misrepresentation to suggest that the criticism is about the "younger-skewing" format -- particularly because the article doesn't call it "younger-skewing".
This is an interesting topic that I'd like to see in DYK. I searched to see if sources published since the article's creation might update the content or help with hook wording. The Columbia Journalism Review has a good article about the background of the controversy. It refers to Chasing New Jersey as "infotainment", which could be the basis for a good hook fact. I also found this piece about the station's defense of the show and an amusing Village Voice blog. Finally, this snippet indicates that the show is doing very well in ratings -- there's not enough there to use in an article, but it's worth looking into... --Orlady (talk) 21:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
How about this (note that the article would need to be edited to support this hook):
  • ALT3: ... that WWOR-TV has been criticized for cancelling its newscast and replacing it with Chasing New Jersey, which has been called "infotainment"? --Orlady (talk) 21:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
  • The new edits help, but I think there needs to be someone quoted as actually calling the show "infotainment" for the ALT3 hook to be supported; the use of the word in the article is not sufficient. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Despite repeated pings on ViperSnake151's talk page (including a "last call" three days ago), the hook is still not supported, though VS has made well over 130 edits since the latest ping. Trying one more time; if this page still hasn't gotten a response in the next day or so, I'll regretfully have to close this nomination as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:57, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
    • I'd like this closed. All of the possible hooks are unsupported by the current state of the article, and it is no longer relevant as a DYK because it has been too long since it was nominated. ViperSnake151  Talk  22:45, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Chasing_New_Jersey&oldid=1022410819"