Talk:WUPA/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: Aoidh (talk · contribs) 04:15, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Will review this over the next day or so. - Aoidh (talk) 04:15, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Please see the comments below.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Prose comments

• Some of the section headers in the History section have a timeline of years (1995–2006) while others do not (The independent years) can the years be included in each relevant section header for consistency?
  • Done.

Construction, land mobile dispute, and STV years

• In actuality, the owner was not Clint Murchison but Clyde A. Murchison, whom a 1982 news article described as Clint's great-nephew. could the paper the article was in (AJC) be included in the prose for context?
  • Done.
• However, its arrival was not a complete start-up for a myriad of technical reasons. I'm not quite sure what "a complete start-up" means in this context?
  • Reworded.

The independent years

• ...an initial agreement reached to sell the station to the RBP Corporation, a Massachusetts concern, but no transaction was consummated. I had to look up what a concern was in this context because I was unfamiliar with the term. If this is referring to Concern (business) could that perhaps be wikilinked for others unfamiliar with that term?
  • Simply reworded.
• WVEU featured an eclectic mix, a function of being the "poor cousin" of Atlanta independent television. If "poor cousin" is a quote could it be attributed to the source along with "quicker picker-upper"? Who considered the station to be these things?
  • Added author information.

CBS 69?

• The section header for WUPA#CBS 69? might need to be reworded; per MOS:SECTIONSTYLE, section headings should not be phrased as a question.
  • Changed to "Almost a CBS affiliate"
• it was an unexpected windfall. since the deal didn't go through should that perhaps be it would be an unexpected windfall or it would have been an unexpected windfall?
  • CBS went through and bought it.

UPN affiliation (1995–2006)

• Despite the upheaval, WVEU came out with something just as valuable to its future. This is probably just my personal opinion but I feel like that sentence could be removed entirely and it not affect the article. Who says it's just as valuable?
  • Reworded.

@Sammi Brie: I spot checked about 10 or so of the sources and there were no verifiability concerns. The only issues I could find were the minor points above. - Aoidh (talk) 06:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Aoidh: Ready for your consideration. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sammi Brie: Y Good to go. - Aoidh (talk) 06:49, 17 December 2022 (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.