Talk:Sporadic E propagation

Merge from TV and FM DX
The E-Skip section of TV and FM DX should be merged into this article. I tried to follow the instructions on the official way to propose this but... they're stupidly complicated and I gave up. Perhaps someone could do it for me. --Mwongozi (talk) 13:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 06:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sporadic E propagation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070624122447/http://www.amfmdx.net/fmdx/sporadic-e.html to http://www.amfmdx.net/fmdx/sporadic-e.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:24, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Notable sporadic E DX receptions
Recent entries here cite YouTube, Twitter or Internet forum posts, which are not WP:RS. - LuckyLouie (talk) 14:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Edit summaries like this one claiming "There are instances of other users who use forum.wtfda, Youtube, or their own blogs for their sources/verification, so this section should not have a SPS tag. Do NOT make another edit of this" are simply misinformed. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a justification. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place to post claims that are verifiable only to a self-published source. Please see WP:RS, etc. The section in question is for notable claims made notable by being published in reliable sources, per WP:V. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:05, 10 August 2021 (UTC)


 * YouTube is mentioned only because users there were recording actual DX programming off-air and posting the video as proof that the signals were received. So basically someone claims to have picked up the soon-to-be-defunct CIII-TV-2 100kW analogue transmissions in some distant, faraway locale, they record a few snowy minutes of Global Toronto announcer Dawna Friesen or some other talking head on that station (and you'd be surprised how far they can bounce now that there's not much of anything else on that channel - largely because no one wants VHF DT2 after the digital transition), then they post the video as evidence of reception. How is this any less reliable than the conventional means of confirming a DX contact, by which a radio station's listener would fire off a snail-mail letter to some faraway station, identify the frequency, time, programme being broadcast, then get back a confirmation on paper that the station was indeed broadcasting that programme on that frequency at that time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.237.50.221 (talk • contribs)
 * See WP:RSPYT, sorry. I don't make the rules. (Is posting things on YouTube any different than the old fashioned SINPO/snail mail/QSL method? Yes it is. For one thing, it'd be pretty easy to create a "proof of DX reception" video using streamed programming off the web and editing tools) - - LuckyLouie (talk) 13:35, 2 December 2021 (UTC)