Talk:WMMS/Archive 2

Rationale for deletion of disambiguation page

Per the WP:Disambig page, "If only a primary topic and one other topic require disambiguation, then disambiguation links are sufficient, and a disambiguation page is unnecessary." Since the radio station call letters are the primary identification and the acronym for a school in San Leandro, California is a secondary identification, a hat note is sufficient and requires no more steps than would a disambiguation page for people seeking the school. - Dravecky (talk) 01:16, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Update: Washington Manor Middle School now serves as a redirect to San Lorenzo Unified School District.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 09:27, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

101 FM

Odd, but while there is a poster that proves the station was listed as 101 FM (before the advent of the LCD display on FM receivers in the 80's), there is no mention of it in the article. I remember it being 101 FM when I was a kid until around 1982 (or '83) when the 100.7 become the commercially advertised frequency. Any reason WMMS old '101' frequency not mentioned? Ryecatcher773 (talk) 05:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Station used 100.7 under MetroMedia '68-72. "Big Mouth" and "Rainbow" logos, along w/ multiple print sources, verify this. Soon after Malrite took control in late '72, "101 FM" used on "Magic Mushroom" logo — a rounding-off which, as Rye points out, remained in use for roughly a decade. To answer your question, Rye, no there's no good reason to leave this out. I'll add it sooner or later (unless someone else does before me).  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 09:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Update: done.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 07:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Format

WMMS identifies itself as "Cleveland's Rock Station". WMMS self reports as "Active Rock" to Arbitron. RadioLocator.com lists the WMMS format as "Rock".

Yes, the station is also the FM flagship for the Cleveland Browns, but this has already been noted in the lead, the infobox, and the sports coverage sub-section. WMMS does not cover sports year round or even daily. With few exceptions, the station airs sports play-by-play 20 Sundays every year—that's it. 1 day out of 7 per week, 20 weeks out of 52 in a year. WMMS is a hot talk/active rock formatted station that happens to share flagship duties for a pro sports team.

As for the Cavs and Indians, the sports coverage box will more than suffice. Scheduling conflicts like these are relatively rare and hardly worth mentioning in the lead. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 13:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Withdrawn. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 18:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I've left sports in the lead, but I think the infobox was getting a little crowded. I've observed that most sources -- online and in print -- identify WMMS as a rock-talk hybrid; no mention of sports-in-general. Yes, the station is the flagship for the Browns. Yes, certain Indians and Cavs games air during the spring during scheduling conflicts on WTAM. Yes, sports-in-general is still a relatively minor share of the station's programming. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 00:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

To be more precise, mention of Browns coverage only in the lead will suffice. Description of format should stay as is (i.e., a hot talk/active rock).  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 07:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Cavs/Tribe

Please leave in the note about WMMS serving as the backup station for Indians and Cavaliers conflicts on WTAM.

Is it a major part of their programming...no, but it has served in that capacity for a number of years, and a couple of sentences in the article should not hurt anything.

Vjmlhds 14:44, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The information regarding Cavs/Indians coverage was moved from the Browns sub-section into the general text of Current programming; no content was removed. As a side, I really don't think there's anything "major" about airing a limited number of Cavs and Indians games every year. Also, please note that the Clint O'Connor article from The Plain Dealer ("At the Controls: Clear Channel Programmer Rules Radio in Cleveland", 9/22/2022) verifies that WMMS did not begin airing Browns games until the 2002 season. Do not change/alter/remove properly sourced content.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 00:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it's the discussion more than the actual content in the article but the subject of sports coverage has a slight ring of puffery to me. One has to remember that Clear Channel switched the Browns broadcasts from WMJI to WMMS to prop up its dismal ratings. Adding sports programming was more an indication of how far the station had fallen rather than a measure of its stature. Piriczki (talk) 13:44, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

The reasons why they carry sports are irrelevant, for the article, all that needs to be there is that they do carry them. And I don't see why a small note basically saying "BTW...besides the Browns, they also carry a few Indians and Cavs games as WTAM's backup station when there's a conflict" is causing such furor. One man's standards of "notability" is different from anothers. They carry them, and a small note at the end of the Browns section (since it's all in the realm of sports) is not worth all this hub-bub. Vjmlhds 14:37, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Piriczki- you're absolutely right (on both the "puffery" and the Browns move). Ten years ago the station was in very bad shape relative to its peak in the 1970s/80s. Kevin Metheney (aka "Pig Virus") thought moving the Browns over from WMJI might boost ratings (incidentally, the station is now back in the top ten, though I think this has more to do with the shift to hot talk in both the AM and PM drives). As for the Cavs and Indians, I'm not opposed to a brief mention somewhere in the article, just not their own devoted section.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 17:59, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

It all kinda comes together in a way--WMMS' resurgence came by going from a pure rock station to a hybrid "Mancave" format. Testosterone feuled "hot talk" in AM in PM drive, rock middays and overnight, a mixed hot talk/rock program in the evening (Sixx Sense), and Browns football. Once 'MMS found their footing with this new format, they became the designated Indians/Cavs backup station because it fit in with the "mancave" motif. My only problem was that the Indians/Cavs tidbit was thrown in in the middle of the article, looking like it was just slapped on there with duct tape. My thing was that info should be included alongside the Browns info because it all fits under sports. I see Levdr's point about making a seperate "section" as it were, so I think a fair compromise would be merley adding a sentence or two to the Browns section as a "BTW". Vjmlhds 18:30, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I cannot find a single reliable source online, on air, or in print which uses the term "mancave" to describe the station's programming. The burden of evidence falls on the editor. WP:RELIABLE There is also no basis for the claim that the combination of rock and talk lead to the airing of Cavs and/or Indians games: WMMS began airing these teams, solely as a backup to WTAM, 4–5 years before hot talk became the norm for afternoons, depending on when exactly The Maxwell Show switched from music, to music-talk, to all-talk. WP:SYNTHESIS WMMS *rarely* airs Cavs and Indians games; WMMS does not promote the airing of such games on air, or on its website, or via social media; and no media outlet has ever covered the subject of WMMS airing Cavs and/or Indians games (aside from programming notes). It's just not that notable. Nor does it significantly enhance a reader's understanding of the topic of WMMS. The question isn't where to place this content so much as whether the content belongs at all.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 01:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about the article, I was talking about WMMS in general, as part of the conversation you and Piriczki were having. I described what WMMS is doing now as a "mancave" format to best describe the hybrid rock/hot talk/Browns mix. I would never put that term in the article itself, as it's not an official radio format. WTAM always promotes when either the Indians or Cavs get shuffled over to "The Buzzard", so it does get promoted. WMMS became the Tribe/Cavs backup station right around the time they got the Browns, so it's kinda connected. It could easily be said that WMMS set the stage for morphing/evolving into their "mancave" format when the got the Browns. Vjmlhds 02:46, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

WMMS *announces* when Cavaliers and Indians games air. WMMS *promotes* when Browns games and other related coverage airs-- on air ("your home for Cleveland Browns football"), online (website displays Browns logo prominently on main page, lists Browns schedule during season, etc.), and via social media (WMMS Facebook page: "Home of Rover's Morning Glory, The Alan Cox Show, and Cleveland Browns Football... Radio Flagship of your CLEVELAND BROWNS. Here we go BROWNIES, HERE we GO! ... " etc.). As for "mancave", I don't really think using your own made-up term helps much here.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 03:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Primary logo

The station webmaster frequently rotates the image in the upper left corner of the official site's main page; the station Facebook page uses the new logo (a fan page which, in many ways, is now more important than the official site itself); and the station's page/feed on iHeartRadio uses the new logo. There's also a new Rover billboard up in at least two locations which uses the new logo (I-90/OH-2 westbound near the Cleveland foodbank, I-71 southbound between Downtown and Hopkins Airport). Most importantly — and let's be clear on this point — there is not a single reliable source to verify that WMMS has changed its primary logo.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Uh...what? The logo doesn't change on the station's upper left corner. It stays the same whether you look at the page for 2 minutes or 2 hours. And what better source than THE STATION'S OWN WEBSITE do you need to see they're using a new logo. And those Rover billboards...those have been up forever...it wasn't like they just got put up today...those have been there awhile. Seriously...you lose all credibility when you state that a FAN PAGE holds more water than THE STATION'S OWN WEBSITE. You want WP:SOURCE? How about the station's own web page...can't get a better source than that. Vjmlhds 03:36, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

First, the logo used in the upper left corner of the station's website has changed repeatedly over the last 2-3 years — from the new logo (alone); to the new logo (tilted to the left); to the new logo + "Cleveland's Rock Station" (at least two different variations); to a Buzzard with a Browns helmet on; to a Buzzard in an Indians uniform; to a Buzzard in a Cavs uniform; to bold face letters saying "100.7 WMMS" with the new logo; to bold face letters saying "100.7 WMMS" with the David Helton buzzard; etc. Second, I am not questioning the station website as a source (the same website which *currently* uses the new logo at least 3X on the main page). Third, the Rover billboards have not "been up forever"; they have been used continuously, whether on a rotating digital billboard or a traditional print billboard, for less than one year. Fourth, I contend that my credibility is largely based on reliable sources (Google News/Books, various online/print Media, The Plain Dealer, etc.). Fifth, perhaps I misspoke — the WMMS Facebook Fan page is not a page run by fans, it is a page for fans run by the station, and is updated multiple times daily by station staff and management. Sixth, The Plain Dealer, Cleveland.com, Cleveland Magazine, etc. have done stories on the station's adoption of a new logo. There is currently nothing to indicate that has changed, aside from the official site, which has a history of changing that image depending on the time of year. Sometimes it is necessary to take multiple sources into account.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 04:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, please try not to shout.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 04:14, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

FYI-- in case anyone thinks I'm referring to the "Witness" Rover billboard w/ the black background, I'm not. The new billboard I'm referring to has a white background; Rover is holding a chain leash around a black-leather/metal-bikini-wearing woman beneath the words "Rover Dominates Mornings".  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 04:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

At first I thought this was just a silly mistake. But maybe it's not. I have to say that WMMS has been "Home of the Buzzard" for almost 40 years, the buzzard was and is one of the most recognizable logos in the midwest, and this whole business of a stupid trendy flaming shield logo should have gotten someone fired a long time ago. Looking around, I'm not so sure that the stupid trendy flaming shield logo is actually their "new" logo... "new" as in replacing the old... out with old and in with the new... etc. If this were the case then the old buzzard logo would be gone. It is not. I get the impression that this is an "also" logo. A "maybe this little venture will make people think we're edgy" logo. A quick perusal of archive.org did reveal two recent instances of wmms.com using the "new" logo prominently on their web page (1,2) So the claim of rotating logos on wmms.com is supported. For me it's a tossup. I think the "old" logo is the one that should be in the article. But since WMMS went and poured mud in the soup in an effort to make it more tasty, and cause a whole bunch of people to think that stupid trendy flaming shield logo is the future, then who am I to argue? Let it ride as far as I'm concerned. – JBarta (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Things change. WMMS is not the same station it was in 1970s and 80s when the David Helton buzzard was truly "one of the most recognizable logos in the midwest" (I would argue the whole nation). Its cultural impact has since diminished. Reliable sources from The Plain Dealer, Cleveland Magazine, Cleveland Scene, AllAccess.com, among others, support this — and, more importantly, that WMMS adopted a new logo in 2008 when Rover joined the station (orange wings, not "flames"). I cannot find a single reliable source online or in print which states anything has changed since 2008. Can you find the logo you uploaded anywhere else besides the upper left corner of the official website? I can't. Compare that to the winged road-sign version which is found not only the official site, but the station's Facebook page, the station's iHeartRadio feed, the "Rover Dominates Mornings" billboard viewable from Cleveland interstates, television spots (WOIO "brought to you by" ad, recent commercial), etc. It's clear you do not agree with the direction the station has taken; that is not justification to remove properly sourced content from this article.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 21:31, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

"A new station logo also appeared — a road sign emblazoned with 100.7 WMMS that sports wispy orange wings."  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 21:37, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I think it's also worth noting that the David Helton buzzard already appears not once, but twice in this article.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 21:44, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

99X and Nikki Sixx

I put the 99X logo under the 100.7 logo in the infobox as it is WMMS' subchannel.

This is similar to how the "Me TV Cleveland" and "This TV Cleveland" logos are situated in the WOIO and WBNX articles respectively.

Also, leave Nikki Sixx in his own little section (just like Rover and Alan Cox are), as his show is a rock and talk mix. That and he's a nationally known figure, and WMMS highly promotes him.

Vjmlhds 17:05, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Sixx Sense with Nikki Sixx is a syndicated program (unlike Rover and Alan Cox, who are both based out of WMMS); there are two other syndicated music shows (three if you count The Sideshow Countdown with Nikki Sixx), which also air on WMMS — at some point, we need to limit the number of sub-sections. And aside from the Premiere Networks' press release, there has been no coverage of Nikki Sixx airing on WMMS, so I'm not at all convinced he needs his own section. WMMS does not "highly promote" Nikki Sixx; compared to Rover, Alan Cox, and the Browns, Nikki Sixx is barely promoted (if at all). He was given a little push during the weeks after his evening show's premiere, but that's pretty much it. Also, whatever talk there is on that show is comparable to Maria's midday shift or any of the overnight/weekend music shifts. The *majority* of content is music, so it makes sense to group with the other rock music. As for the logo, bear in mind that this article is about the station which broadcasts at 100.7, not the 250 watt FM translator at 99.1 which simulcasts the WMMS-HD2 digital subchannel — a "radio station" based on an FCC loophole (normally, FM translators are not allowed to originate their own programming). I'm considering creating an article for the FM translator, anyway. Normally WP:WPRS would not allow for this, but since HD2 FM translator stations are a relatively new phenomenon, and since all available media seems to be treating 99.1 as an actual new station, and since there are several articles which treat these new HD2 FM translator stations as their own stations, I think we can get by with a "W256BT" article. Regardless, the point I'm really driving at here is that you can't have two stations (or one "real" station, one "pseudo" station) represented in the infobox simultaneously. The FM translator is noted in the "Translator(s)" field of the infobox; the new website 99xcleveland.com is listed in the external links section; and there is a detailed section in the current programming section of the body. In fact, I was the one who added the 99X logo to highlight that very content. Leave it at that. Wikipedia readers who search for "WMMS" are looking for 100.7; the infobox is not an exhaustive description of the subject, but rather a means to highlight its major aspects.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 18:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources

There is an Internet user registered as "vjm" who regularly posts on the Cleveland discussion board at radio-info.com. There is also a user registered as "Vjmlhds" who regularly contributes to Wikipedia. This same Wikipedia user also claims to be the "vjm" who posts at radio-info.com (see edit here). I bring this up because of recent edits made by Wikipedia user Vjmlhds to this article, specifically this user's insistence on using the term "man cave" to describe the WMMS format. With the sole exception of the largely uncredited online blog ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com (the only source Vjmlhds has ever cited), I cannot find a single source online or in print which uses the term "man cave" to describe the WMMS format. The *only* other use I can find is on the radio-info.com discussion boards.

Since January 2011, there have been approximately 52 references to the WMMS format using the terms "mancave", "man-cave", or "man cave" on the Cleveland radio-info.com board: 7 references from a user registered as "Nathan Obral", a name which suggests this user is the secondary contributor to ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com; 2 from a user registered as "Ohio Media Watch", a name which more than suggests this user is the primary (and anonymous) contributor to ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com; and 9 references from 7 other users, none of which used "mancave" more than twice. The remaining 32 references to the WMMS format using "mancave", more than all others combined, were made by radio-info.com user vjm. Moreover, vjm was the first to use the term on the discussion board (see January 13, 2011 posting here).

User "vjm"/"Vjmlhds" has heavily promoted the "mancave" term, first by initiating it, then by repeating it again and again in the very forum used by the authors of ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com. For this reason, and because of the general lack of formality associated with the term (WP:TONE); and because of the anonymity of the ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com author which Vjmlhds cites (WP:RELIABLE); and because of the lack of editorial oversight at ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com (again, WP:RELIABLE); and perhaps most importantly, because of vjm/Vjmlhds' direct interaction with "Ohio Media Watch" and "Nathan Obral" at the radio-info.com boards ... I see no reason to include the term "mancave" in this article.

Disclosure: I myself have posted at radio-info.com, but only ever in one topic (which I started), and only 3 times ever. The subject of that topic was Cleveland Browns games airing on WMMS from 1968 to 1984 when then-sister station WHK was the Browns flagship. The subject of the general WMMS format was *not* addressed.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 23:30, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I can't believe you are questioning the reliability of OMW. OMW has always been a reference used for info on Cleveland area radio and TV stations here on Wikipedia in multiple articles, and there's never been a problem with it as a source before.

As far as the "man cave" thing goes, I was the first to use it on the radio-info boards. It all stemmed from discussions on what kind of rock music WMMS plays. I was making the point that the station was more concerned about being an all-purpose male targeted station with the combination of hot talk, rock, and sports, instead of worrying about what particular kind of rock music they play. In other words a radio "man cave". Others started using the term on the radio-info board, and then OMW began using it on his main blog.

I don't see how my connection with OMW (which really isn't a connection...I've talked to him on the boards, and e-mailed him a couple of times, but we wouldn't know each other if we crossed paths on the street) means anything concerning OMW's credibility/reliability. He does his own thing on his blog. He has connections with local media, and he doesn't post anything unless it's a stone cold, lead pipe lock with sources.

The fact Levdr actually went back and researched all the times the "man cave" term was used on a discussion board shows something else...he has a beef with me. Me and him have gone round and round before (and I'll admit to not always being on my best behavior after some heated back-and-forths), but the fact that he's now questioning a long used Wiki source whose credibility and reliability has never before been questioned, shows he's just picking nits with me. Nathan Orbal does his own thing, OMW does his own thing, and I do my own thing. Just my personal opinion, but I think Levdr's sudden questioning of OMW is purely a side effect of his rivalry with me. If someone else had first used the "man cave" term, and OMW picked up on it, I don't think he'd have such a problem with it. Vjmlhds 02:47, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I've had doubts about the reliability of ohiomediawatch.wordpress.com for some time now, as evidenced by my removal of Ohio Media Watch sources in this article over the last several months. That's not to say OMW can't ever be a reliable source; more often than not, OMW is the *only* source on local media in Northeast Ohio, and I appreciate that. The problem I have in this specific case is that the "man cave" term, by vjm/Vjmlhds' own admission, originated from vjm/Vjmlhds him/herself. This runs contrary to reliability; at the very least, I would like to see at least one additional source from a third party which uses the term, and I would like the addition of "man cave" to come from someone other than vjm/Vjmlhds who, again, admits to first using the term in a forum where OMW contributors regularly post. This would, of course, conveniently overlook the lack of formality of the term per WP:TONE. Note that "Man cave" is not found in Category:Radio stations by format. And that "Man cave" is not found under Radio_format#List_of_formats.

However sophisticated OMW may be, the chief contributor refuses to identify him/herself (thereby eliminating any potential conflicts of interest), and apparently isn't subject to any kind of editorial oversight. OMW is not The Plain Dealer. Thus it tests basic Wikipedia standards of reliability and verifiability. Moreover, the OMW blog has (in the past) expressly removed itself from any discussion of "format analysis".

As for any so-called "beef" with vjm/Vjmlhds, all I can say is, "what beef?" I have interacted with vjm/Vjmlhds in the past, and at times I have questioned his/her editing — adding content to an article w/o a reliable source to verify and/or demonstrate notability, possibly editing from an unregistered IP to pose as a separate editor, etc. In general, however, I find his/her contributions valid and constructive. Friction occurs because vjm/Vjmlhds has, by his/her own admission, not adequately familiarized him/herself with "wiki-ese" (WP policies and guidelines); as such, I occasionally revert an edit vjm/Vjmlhds makes (we both frequently edit local Northeast Ohio media articles) which do not conform to established WP policy and guidelines.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 05:27, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

For one thing, I'm a guy, so "he" and "his" are fine. And for another, OMW keeps his identity hidden because he's worked in the Cleveland media, and has contacts, and revealing himself would compromise his ability to get information to post and report on.

As I've stated, OMW always makes sure to include sources when he posts a story, so it's not like he's just pulling things out of the air. If he says it, it's money.

I was kind of honored OMW started using "man cave" to describe WMMS, which is why I included it in the article, and the only reason I came up with the term to start with was to have a quick and easy description of the station's hybrid, male demographic-focused mix of hot talk, rock, and sports.

I still can't help but think that Levdr went through all this trouble and is questioning OMW's reliability just because OMW picked up on a term I began using on a silly little discussion board to descibe a radio station's format.

I never said "man cave" was an official radio format. And I also made sure to not include the term in the info box or in the main format description in the opening of the article. All I did was mention that it has been described as "man cave" radio due to it's mixed format, with a source (OMW) to back me up so no one could think I was just throwing stuff in the article for my own amusement. Was I the first to use the term? Yes. But others then started using it, and some (like OMW) even took the term for use in their own endeavors.

I still don't see how all of a sudden, OMW's credibility and realibility are questioned just because he used a term to describe a radio station that he just happened to get from me. Vjmlhds 13:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Anonymous blogs or discussion boards are not a reliable sources, plain and simple. Further, trendy slang terms such as "man cave" should be avoided because they may not be understood by readers worldwide. It also appears this term is being propagated by a single person and is not widely recognized in reference to the subject of this article. Piriczki (talk) 14:18, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Then how do you describe the station? Huh? It is not a music station, and it certainly isn't a hot talk station. It has sizable blocks of both, in addition to a heavy amount of sports play-by-play. Do you then call WMMS "a jumbled mess" or something else? I would like to know. Furthermore, any complaints about Ohio Media Watch are purely personal, and in the case of Levdr's actions on a radio chat board to "out" the anonymous blogger, purely vindictive and hate-filled. Nathan Obral (talk) 03:44, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I think it might help if we kept this discussion on a single talk page. User_talk:Levdr1lostpassword#Ohio_Media_Watch Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 03:55, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I have started a discussion on the appropriate noticeboard at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Ohio_Media_Watch. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 07:06, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Programming

Rover's Morning Glory and The Alan Cox Show are both highly prominent, highly rated shows in this radio market; both air during weekday morning and afternoon drive times, respectively; both shows are local; and, perhaps most importantly, both still air live and are the only regular dayparts which continue to do so. WMMS uses the slogan "Cleveland's Rock Station"; self-reports an "Active Rock" format to Arbitron; is identified on Radio-Locator.com as a "Rock" station; and the station airs an alternative rock format on its HD2 digital subchannel — all this without even considering the station's history and reputation as a rock station. Lastly, WMMS is the FM flagship for the Browns. ... Rover, Alan Cox, Rock, Browns — this is neither a "cluttered" nor "sloppy" way to summarize the main aspects of WMMS programming (as described here).  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 04:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, "single-sentence paragraphs should be minimized." (MOS:LAYOUT, WP:BETTER)  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 05:00, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, teacher. Vjmlhds 17:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on content, not editors. (WP:PERSONAL)  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 23:43, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Rover replay

When does the Rover replay air? This is the first I've heard of it. Vjmlhds 17:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Ask that kind of question on my talk page, not here. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 01:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC) The Rover replay airs from 2-6am on the iHeartRadio feed. Several weeks ago Rover addressed this during his morning show; it's Clear Channel's way of cutting costs. Streaming music online is more expensive than a Rover replay, and relatively few people listen during the overnight hours. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 08:10, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

WMMS/Tribe

OK...let's do this:

Let's leave it up to consensus to see if a small note about WMMS being the backup station for the Tribe should be in here or not. This way there is no butting heads like a couple of rams. Let's get some outside voices in here, and whatever the consensus says will go.

• Yes, A small note of 2 sentences explaining that when there are Indians/Cavs conflicts on WTAM, the Tribe comes to WMMS is worth noting. The Indians have to go somewhere when there's a conflict, and how is it not notable that a station airs at least a little bit of MLB play by play? Vjmlhds 13:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

There is already a discussion on this topic (and on this talk page) at #Cavs/Tribe. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 07:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The Indians and Clear Channel have now signed a new 5 year contract, where WMMS will essentially become the Indians FM flagship station, simulcasting about 90% of the games with WTAM. Since the new contract states that all Indians games will be on WTAM, this also means that WMMS will also serve (as they have done for years) as the backup station for the Cavs when there are Tribe/Cavs conflicts. So with 150+ Indians games (including spring training), 20 Browns games (including preseason), and maybe half a dozen or so Cavs games, that makes nearly 180 sports broadcasts per year now on WMMS. This should justify adding sports to their description, as the station is now clearly a mix of hot talk, active rock, and sports. Vjmlhds 19:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

WMMS is *not* the FM flagship for the Indians; not a single source uses the word "flagship" to describe WMMS coverage of the Indians, while all available sources do use "flagship" to describe WTAM's role. Secondly, not a single sources says anything about Cavaliers coverage. Lastly, the Browns have not yet announced who will serve as the team's flagship station for 2013 and beyond, and as the 2012 season is now over, neither WMMS nor WTAM are the team's current flagship. As of right now, the only thing to change is that the station has swapped complete and flagship-status coverage for the Browns for incomplete (no weekday-day Tribe games will air on WMMS) and non-flagship coverage for the Indians. So, no, nothing has really chanaged in regards to the station's format. Even if the station wins rights to the Browns, WMMS will remain a hot talk/active rock hybrid format; Browns and Indians play-by-play are seasonal and are not part of the station's regular, year-round programming. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 21:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Indians affiliate list, which is not current, referred to here. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 23:02, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I have restored the Browns content – for now – per this Crain's article. Apparently, WMMS/WTAM retain the rights until the spring... whenever that is exactly. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 00:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The March equinox – the start of "spring" – occurs in late March. The 2013 NFL Draft begins April 25. There is no guarantee that WMMS/WTAM will still have rights to the Browns when the draft begins. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 00:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Let's see how the Browns advertise their draft coverage. If it's on WTAM/WMMS, then it's business as usual. If not, then something may be up. It's the only fair and impartial way to know for sure short of a major announcemt. Vjmlhds 01:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Obviously, given the Crain's article, the Browns content should remain until at least the NFL Draft (i.e., unless other news surfaces before then). I noted that spring starts before the NFL Draft because you were assuming that WMMS/WTAM will retain rights through the NFL Draft... merely because the WMMS/WTAM rights expire at some point in the spring. Retaining the Browns rights until some point during the spring and retaining them through the NFL Draft are not the same thing. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 02:41, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

One other point. WMMS almost certainly will not be streaming Indians games online, whether through iHeartRadio or WMMS.com itself. MLB.com charges a subscription fee to stream games online, and I don't see that changing. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 17:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

No station can stream MLB games as per MLB.com rules. WMMS will more than likely air Rock Nation or Sixx Sense (depending on the time of the game) online during Tribe games. Vjmlhds 19:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

There is no reason to think WMMS will stream anything other than its regularly scheduled programming when Indians games are played on-air. Your speculation is not relevant here. Levdr1lostpassword / talk 19:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Just so everything's clear, Clear Channel issued a release detailing how many 2013 (regular season) Indians games will air on WTAM and how many on WMMS. 100.7 will air 147 games (144 in simulcast, 3 exclusive), and 159 on WTAM (with 144 simulcast on "The Buzzard"). I point this out because it wouldn't be correct in the article to merely say 144 games per year. Due to the scheduling logistics of the stations (i.e. Browns and Cavs games) if this year is an indicator, it may be more or less in any given year depending on the circumstances. So in the article, it would be easier just to say "...over 140 games per year will air...". Vjmlhds 21:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)