Talk:WUVN

WUVN is currently a Television good article nominee. Nominated by Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) at 16:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

Short description: TV station in Hartford, Connecticut

Television: Stations Low‑importance

	Television portal 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
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).

Connecticut Low‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I mistakenly reverted 205.188.116.66's edit on September 3, thinking they copied the entire article once again (which, admittedly they didn't). However, while their latest edit seems to have been re-written so that it isn't entirely a carbon copy of the website in question, the re-write is still rather poorly written and structured (as is 205.188.116.xx's usual style, no offense to them). If anyone wants to restore 205.188.116.66's edit (as a properly written and structured article), go ahead. (I probably won't get around to this task anytime soon.) - Hinto 20:41, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

205.188.116.66 had decided to copy the content from [1] again, and again interspersed content from that page with his/her own poorly articulated additions. I've attempted to re-word the article so that it sounds less like a direct copy from the aforementioned site; if you don't think it's enough, either re-word it further or just delete the whole thing and start from scratch (though I have a feeling 205.188.116.xx will do his/her thing again should that happen). - Hinto 02:51, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WHTX-LP channel number

The article states WHTX-LP is channel 43, however the FCC information gives the channel for WHTX-LP at channel 10. Jimtrue 11:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Analog-to-digital conversion

There is nothing in this Wikipedia article that discusses the analog-to-digital conversion, or CSA with WUTH. Can anyone expand on these? Seven1672 (talk) 19:14, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

@Sammi Brie, Nathan Obral, MrSchimpf, Wcquidditch, and BlueboyLINY: I propose merging WUTH-CD into WUVN. Even though WUTH-CD is the host station in the channel-sharing arrangement, it's not notable on its own, but it's at least worth a brief mention at WUVN. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your ping didn't hit because it was after the fact. You are probably right here, though. The history seems to be WXTV translator, sold to Entravision after it bought WUVN, Telefutura at launch. The concern I'd have is that this article's scope already is a little unwieldy, and WUTH-CD's history would become a footnote. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I tried it, @Mvcg66b3r. It's a small footnote, and it works. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Nominator: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 16:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs) 07:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one! It's very long, so might take some time, and I'll go section-wise. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Woww, six paras.

First,3rd,4th, 6th para-fine
Second para- "Hartford's channel 3":"Hartford's VHF channel 3" (if that is what it is trying to say)
- Yes, and I've spelled out UHF and VHF.
Fifth para- "as the market's third independent": is there a word missing
- In this case, "independent" is short for "independent station". I will never use just "independent" on first reference but may on second and later.
I might go through it again after reviewing the body too, but till then, is there anything in "In 1960, RKO General acquired WHCT ... outside of sports broadcasts." these 2.5 paras that can be shortened- the lead is kinda long?

This is a massive lead, the longest I've ever written and probably ever will write, and it's longer than frankly should be recommended. You may be able to see why once you read the prose. The station's history divides into five broad buckets, which are the way the lead is structured beyond paragraph 1 and also the first five level-2 headings. These are the early years, when the station was a network affiliate and in the immediate aftermath of the CBS exit; RKO's ownership and Phonevision; Faith Center ownership; the Astroline era including the six years of silence from 1991 to 1997; and Entravision ownership with Univision programming beginning in 2000. The transitions between them are very clear-cut in terms of programming orientation, too. I really would like, once you're done reading this, an outsider's view of how this might be structured in fewer paragraphs. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Early years

All fine
Half a suggestion and half a joke, but have you thought about making and adding a flowchart to explain all this?

Subchannels

All fine

Images and References

References all fine
Images- Any possibility of more images?
- I wish. The original studio building on Asylum in Hartford is still standing and is now loft apartments for artists. Unfortunately, I've never been to Connecticut and don't know anyone from there who could take a picture of it.

Overall

It's big, so that's the remarks for now, will review the actual prose in a day or a few days. Though, could you split some of the paragraphs- they are hard to read when this large- 8-10 lines (on a PC) max per para should be okay. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 18:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]