Template:Did you know nominations/WVSP (North Carolina)

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

WVSP (North Carolina), WRQM

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

)

... that public radio stations WVSP and WRQM in Rocky Mount, North Carolina, suffered from weak listener support and fundraising shortfalls? For WVSP: [1], [2], [3]. WRQM: [4], [5], [6]

Reviewed: Jim Furyk's round of 58 and Felicity Smoak (Arrowverse)
Comment: One new article, one redirect conversion

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 03:53, 21 September 2019 (UTC).

I'm not sure if I'm going to review this nomination, so in the meantime I'd just like to leave a comment. Right now the current hook sounds really niche and not really eye-catchy, and the description of "weak listener support and fundraising" could easily apply to many radio stations around the world. If anything, mentioning about the circumstances of how and why they were struggling would be a better option. Another possibility, though this would likely mean a separate hook for WVSP without mentioning WRQM, could be a hook about how WVSP's first studio was located in a former doctor's office. The options are up to you, of course. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:04, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

To respond to this, I'm going to propose separate hooks: Raymie (t • c) 17:38, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

ALT1a: ... that North Carolina radio station WVSP began operations out of a former doctor's office?

ALT1b: ... that just three years after starting radio station WESQ, North Carolina Wesleyan College decided to cease supporting it, saying it hadn't been able to integrate the station into its curriculum?

Thanks. I'll be doing a review of both articles in a moment, though I'd just like to confirm if it's okay with you for the articles to go up in separate hooks instead of being in one hook as with the original proposal. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 23:07, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

WVSP review

The article meets newness, length, and paraphrasing requirements. ALT1a is cited inline; I am assuming good faith for the source as the Newspapers.com link is unavailable in my country. A QPQ has been done. Should be good to go for WVSP; the review for WRQM/WESQ is to follow, but right now, my main comment is that the article about WRQM ends at the purchase (which was in the 1990s) and doesn't seem to have any newer information. Can such information be added, or is that all there is in the sources?

Note: Please do not move this to the Approved section until I am finished reviewing WRQM/WESQ. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:25, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Since the bot only cares that the latest icon is a tick or not, this was moved to Approved. However, since there is still one article to be reviewed, I'm adding the appropriate icon so no prep set builder will promote this nomination prematurely. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:23, 30 September 2019 (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.

@Narutolovehinata5: Yes, that would be fine if they ran separately. In re WRQM, its entire operation after 1999 was as a semi-satellite of WUNC (FM), so there's not that much to write about in the WRQM page. Similarly, WFSS (a station that was more recently purchased and converted to relay WUNC FM) kind of has its history section stop at the purchase. Raymie (t • c) 18:12, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I see. If that's the case, then perhaps after that then perhaps a brief discussion of it being a satellite station could be added to the history section? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 20:12, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: I added one more sentence that hopefully provides the needed continuity. Raymie (t • c) 04:44, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks; however, the section remains vague on whether or not it still does that to this day, it might be a good idea to clarify that if it's possible. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Added a few words there: they're not cited, but the lede should make it pretty darn obvious and it's more for clarification purposes. Raymie (t • c) 04:16, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

WRQM review

The article also meets DYK requirements, no close paraphrasing was found, and a QPQ has been provided. Article concerns have now been sufficiently addressed. ALT1b is interesting, and cited to a source that I can't access so assuming good faith for the content. This is good to go, but per the recent discussion on WT:DYK regarding US hooks, I would suggest that the articles be promoted at least one week apart from each other (i.e., if WVSP gets promoted, then WRQM should not be promoted until at least one week after that, or vice-versa). Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:45, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Promoting ALT1a, the single article hook for WVSP. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:43, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Promoting ALT1b, the single article hook for WRQM. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 31 October 2019 (UTC)