Talk:A-Channel/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Averageuntitleduser (talk · contribs) 23:54, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Here goes! Comments coming shortly. Averageuntitleduser (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Well-written
I had no idea how entertaining these television articles were, now I understand why you edit them!
 * succesful at obtaining — "successfully obtained"
 * which are currently operated by Bell Media under the CTV 2 banner
 * What do you need here?
 * I... I quite honestly have no idea myself
 * It was competing — this could be construed as a business rivalry instead of two competing bids. I had to reread this section to understand "The AltaWest bid" part.
 * The AltaWest bid was part of CanWest's bid to turn Global into a third national network and envisioned a main station in Calgary. — two things: "envisioned" is conflicting tense-wise, and the sentence is a bit confusing. CanWest, on their own, hasn't been established, nor has their bid. As well, the article leads you to connect "CanWest" and "Global", so referring to them seperately is a bit odd. I was thinking something like: "CanWest Global's plan to turn itself...", but I imagine its not technically correct.
 * Reworded to better clarify this. Since you're likely to ask: our article is Canwest, but they styled it CanWest for most of their history.
 * Looks better.
 * Live @ Five with spaces, or Live@Five without?
 * With. Fixed. (They were inconsistent.)
 * Many of the issues came down to the tapeless playback and editing system — I would clarify/hammer home that, using the system, many news stories ended up lost from the hard drive.
 * What's "BBM"?
 * It's Numeris now. Linked.
 * lagged the CBC — is this a common phrase? If not, use "lagged behind".
 * Isn't "lagged behind" redundant? You're behind if you're lagging.
 * that's fair lol
 * Craig established the A-Channel Production Fund — when? I'd consider moving/incorporating this section elsewhere, as it feels a bit out of place.
 * Moved this up several paragraphs and added a reference. The fund was started before the stations were on the air.
 * Explain The Big Breakfast at first mention.
 * bring the licence terms of its Alberta and Manitoba stations in line — perhaps: "renew the licence terms"?
 * No: they wanted them to expire at the same time, so Craig had the A-Channel (Alberta) licences come up early. Clarified.
 * Ah, got it.

Addressed all items, but there's one you left no action item on. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @Averageuntitleduser Oops. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 18:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Forgive that one; the changes look good! Averageuntitleduser (talk) 19:35, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Verifiable with no original research
Citations are fully formatted. All passages are cited to reliable newspapers, primarily local to Edmonton or Calgary. I've looked at a handful of sources and have found little close paraphrasing or copyvio. However, I have three quibbles.
 * an aggressive, urban, street-level, younger approach — I would emphasize this more in the article
 * At one news conference, a local politician saw an A-Channel cameraman enter the room and began mouthing his words without speaking. — I'm likely missing something, but I couldn't find this in the source.
 * Second page of clipping, first column, toward the top.
 * This is probably a little late for me to realize that you could link to multiple pages, but anywaysss
 * adding 20 games to the latter's existing 28-game inventory. — should "20" and "28" not be swapped?
 * Yup. Good catch.

Spot-check

 * Looks good
 * Indirect, but looks good
 * Looks good
 * Indirect, but looks good
 * Looks good
 * I'm only seeing "A-Channel Drama Fund", looks good otherwise.
 * the name changed about 2002: see . Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 21:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks good within the article now Averageuntitleduser (talk) 12:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * A little more emphasized, (edit: the second page of the other source confirms it) but it works
 * Looks good
 * I'm only seeing "A-Channel Drama Fund", looks good otherwise.
 * the name changed about 2002: see . Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 21:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks good within the article now Averageuntitleduser (talk) 12:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * A little more emphasized, (edit: the second page of the other source confirms it) but it works
 * A little more emphasized, (edit: the second page of the other source confirms it) but it works
 * A little more emphasized, (edit: the second page of the other source confirms it) but it works

Broad in its coverage
All of its activities are discussed wholly, using a wide variety of refs over a long timeframe.

Neutral
Looks good on this front. Opinions, like those of the workers on strike, are attributed and presented fairly.

Stable
No recent content disputes or edit wars.

Illustrated
Images are all correctly labelled as creative commons, own works, or public domain. The logo and buildings all improve the understanding of the reader.

Summary
A very pleasant read, great work!
 * Nice job! I think its just that one comment then; refs 29 and 30 (and I imagine more) mention the channel's younger target demographic, I just think you need to lean into it within the article (so that it works with the lead). Averageuntitleduser (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @Averageuntitleduser Housekeeping: pings don't work unless you sign in the same edit. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 04:50, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * huh, thank you Averageuntitleduser (talk) 12:00, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Averageuntitleduser I reshuffled a paragraph to call out some existing facts on "hip! young!". Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 05:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Read through it, and I quite like it; consider this a pass! Averageuntitleduser (talk) 12:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)