Talk:KGCW/GA1

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

Reviewer: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 13:33, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I will be reviewing this article. I hope to look at this soon, but feel free to ping me if I haven't posted here in a few days. Epicgenius (talk) 20:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Prose, POV, and coverage
Lead:
 * It is owned and operated by network majority owner Nexstar Media Group alongside Rock Island, Illinois–licensed CBS affiliate WHBF-TV (channel 4); Nexstar also provides certain services to Davenport, Iowa–licensed Fox affiliate KLJB (channel 18) under a shared services agreement (SSA) with Mission Broadcasting. - I suggest rewording this sentence, which is currently unwieldy (grammatically it feels like this should be two sentences, but I'm also under the impression that KLJB isn't directly related to KGCW anymore).
 * That's correct. When Nexstar bought Grant, it couldn't swallow the duopoly whole because it was also buying WHBF-TV. And it had no choice but to retain KGCW over KLJB (though it still effectively controls the other station).
 * It was owned by local businessman Steve Hoth, who named it for his wife. - Minor point, but it might be worth mentioning his wife's name in the lead, too.

History:
 * The station went unbuilt for three years. - Does this mean construction did not start for three years? Or did construction start in 1984 and encounter weather-related delays? Also, reference 1 mentions "equipment problems" rather than weather-related delays.
 * It means the latter.
 * despite becoming affiliated with Fox on July 31 - July 31, 1988?
 * In 1991, amid reports that the station's payroll checks were bouncing, the general manager resigned - I'd rephrase to avoid juxtaposing the dates "July 31" and "in 1991", e.g. "the general manager resigned in 1991, amid reports that the station's payroll checks were bouncing"
 * While Hoth hired a Chicago law firm to fight the disaffiliation in court, this was unsuccessful, - I would shorten this, e.g., "Hoth hired a Chicago law firm to fight the disaffiliation in court but was unsuccessful"
 * owed more than $444,000 against $38,000 in assets - In other words there were $444,000 in liabilities. Since assets are the sum of liabilities and equity, I don't think "against" is the right word.
 * Strangely enough, that's how the reference is worded, though I would agree that's a liabilities issue. Documents show the two corporations owe $501,641. Burlington Cablevision owes $57,458 and has no assets, while Burlington Broadcast owes $444,183 and has $36,000 in assets (and it calls the company Burlington Broadcast) I've left this in for now.
 * low-power WBQD-LP debuted in 2002 as the area's UPN affiliate - Which area, in particular? "The area" can refer to either Burlington or the Quad Cities here.
 * Quad Cities. Fixed.
 * KGWB-TV became the local affiliate of The CW upon the merger of The WB and UPN in 2006 under new KGCW-TV call letters - I would actually add commas after "of The CW" and "in 2006" because "upon the merger of The WB and UPN in 2006" is a parenthetical expression, and adding commas would really help with the pace of this sentence.
 * Reworded
 * it was one of the top four-rated stations in the market - "it" being KLJB?
 * Yes. Reworded.

All of these issues should be resolved. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:17, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Technical information:
 * the original date in which - Should this be "the original date on which"?
 * Yes. That wording is still in 40 of these articles and was added a long time ago. Might be worth an AWB/JWB run to tweak it.
 * Turned out that the "date in which" issue was in this and 665 other articles. All changed. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 17:50, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I'll check on this after work. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:09, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Images and copyright

 * There is only one image to speak of (File:KGCW_(2006).svg). The copyright tag for this image seems correct.
 * I don't see any copyright violations, and spot-checks did not review close paraphrasing. The only wording of concern here is obtained a construction permit to build, which is redundant; I'd just say "obtained a construction permit", anyway. Epicgenius (talk) 14:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC)