Talk:KEYE-TV

KEYE-TV has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: June 25, 2024. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Texas / Austin Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Texas - Austin (assessed as Mid-importance). Television: Stations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Television stations task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

A fact from KEYE-TV appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 July 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that a Texas TV station hoped that being named after an eye would ease viewer confusion? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/KEYE-TV.

The term "O&O" used on this page should be explained or linked in some way... AnonMoos 22:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cbs 42 logo.jpg 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on KEYE-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130829004251/http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1082A2.pdf to http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1082A2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:16, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on KEYE-TV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130610153751/http://www.sbgi.net/site_mgr/temp/COX%20Closing_l951bqjg.shtml to http://www.sbgi.net/site_mgr/temp/COX%20Closing_l951bqjg.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Passed. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is transcluded from Talk:KEYE-TV/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 04:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 23:07, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).	All sources seem suitable.
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	I reviewed the one non-zero match (3.8%) found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. Fine per WP:LIMITED. No copyvio/plagiarism issues found during spot checks.
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).	Suitable.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No issues.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No evidence of lack of stability.
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.	Both images PD. Rationale for the logo seems reasonable.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Fine.
	7. Overall assessment.

• Lead: "the station broadened its appeal by affiliating with the new Fox network at its launch in October 1986" - suggest adding more detail (e.g. type of progams/target audience or whatever)
  • Reworded.
• History: "In 1991, it became the first station outside of San Antonio to air a package of San Antonio Spurs basketball games" - doesn't seem particularly notable to me, but perhaps it is. No issues with retaining it.
  • The Spurs now play a series every year in Austin, which is the only reason I've included the sentence.
• History: "Cannan and Beard were now the sole owners" - having more than one sole owner sounds odd to me, but perhaps it is fine in American English.
  • Reworded.
• News operation: "CBS also made investments in weather forecasting and anchor salaries" seems a bit vague, but perhaps the source doesn't permit anything more specific.
  • It does not.
• News operation: "the station had short-lived ratings momentum" - I'm not sure having read the source that "momentum" is quite the right word, but won't insist on a change if you're happy with it.
  • Reworded.
• Notable former on-air staff - both seem notable, and it doesn't say it's a full list, so seems OK. (No action needed)

• Spot check on "The station, renamed KTVV, moved to channel 36 in January 1973" - no issues
• Spot check on "Pappas dropped out, and the four other applicants reached a settlement agreement—announced in June 1982 but not approved until March 1983 by which Television Corporation of Central Texas would be a consultant to a merger of Austin Telecasting, Mountain Laurel, and Texas Television, known as Austin Television." - no issues.
• Spot check on "On October 9, 1986, the station became a charter affiliate of the upstart Fox network" - I'm not sure about "upstart"
• Spot check on "In 1991, it became the first station outside of San Antonio to air a package of San Antonio Spurs basketball games" - no issues.
• Spot check on "That April, CBS agreed to buy the station for $160 million" - no issues.
• Spot check on "Under CBS, management turned over frequently, with six general managers in five years" I think in the context of the article, "six top management changes" does verify this, so no issues.
• Spot check on "The deal was completed on January 3, 2012," - not 100% sure on this one. It's the date of the articel, but the article also mentions "the parties agreed to an effective closing date of Jan. 1, 2012."
• Spot check on "Its news programs were faster-paced than the competition with a higher-than-average reliance on props and unconventional methods of storytelling" - no issues.

Great work as ever, Sammi Brie. I hope the comments above are helpful; I'm happy to discuss any of them. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @BennyOnTheLoose: Thanks for the comments. Should be all addressed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:36, 23 June 2024 (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.

The following 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: promoted by Hey man im josh talk 17:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a Texas TV station hoped that being named for an eye would ease viewer confusion? Source: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/77199766/
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Manizha Talash

Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 695 past nominations.

Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Good to go. Ergo Sum 15:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]