User talk:Mvcg66b3r/Archives/2018/September

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mvcg66b3r. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

So what is the problem with saying that WEEK-TV is no longer carried by Dish Network ([1]? —Mythdon 21:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I added it back and rephrased it. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 21:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

What type of consistency are you referring to? Consistently violating the guidelines?

If you want to be consistent, I suggest you consistently follow them instead.

HandsomeFella (talk) 13:36, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Consistency with other TV station articles. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 13:37, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

And where did you get the idea that you're free to violate the guidelines as long as you do it consistently?

HandsomeFella (talk) 13:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

It's not just me. Other editors do it before I even get to the article. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 13:50, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Let's discuss it here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations#Following guidelines - or disregarding them - consistently.

HandsomeFella (talk) 14:01, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited KPXN-TV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mount Wilson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mvcg66b3r. I'm curious as to why you removed the following paragraph from the lede to the WISH-TV article with the reason "Eliminating 'weasel words'"?

"From 1956 to 2014 the station wa affiliated with CBS. On January 1, 2015, CBS switched its affiliation to WTTV (channel 4). and WISH affiliated with The CW."

I don't have any particular desire to reinsert the paragraph since I had merely copy-edited what an IP user had added in order to make it coherent. However, I don't see any "weasel words" in it. Indyguy (talk) 02:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

The edit was poorly written, and had content that was better explained in the body of the article. BTW, what are "weasel words"? Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:56, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

A weasel word, or anonymous authority, is an informal term for words and phrases such as "researchers believe" and "most people think" which make arguments appear specific or meaningful, even though these terms are at best ambiguous and vague. - perhaps you should be careful how you label edits since that content was in no way "weasel words" (not saying it should be re-added or anything). —Mythdon 03:02, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Maybe I misunderstood what it meant. But the edit was poorly written. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited WNYA, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WNYT (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 26 September 2018 (UTC)