User talk:DrChuck68/Archives/2017/February

TomG2002 blocked
You saw some contributions from me in the radio arena, reverting the edits performed by User:TomG2002 who turned out to be a sockpuppet of a long-term disruption account. I am going to take most of these articles off of my watchlist as it appears you have a good handle on what our readers would like to see. Best wishes... Binksternet (talk) 04:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the kind words. I'll do my best! --DrChuck68 (talk) 17:56, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Do Not Jumble the Radio Template
Hello. I wanted to let you know that I have rolled back most of your radio template edits due to the format. In most of your edits, like in the city of Boston for example, you re-organized and changed the general layout of the template, which doesn't make it easy for me to follow. It appears jumbled and out of place unless everything is together. That's just the way I see things. Plus, it's easier for me to follow while I'm editing. And re-organizing every station categorically by state and/or county seems very redundant and unneeded. We can find out where a station's locality is if we clicked on the link anyways.

If I have caused any headaches for you, my apologies, but it got on my nerves. I don't take changes like that very easily. And if you would, please keep the template format as it is (no state/county separation). --Skeeball93 (talk) 07:19, 18 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I apologize for causing you such confusion. My groupings were an attempt to paint a better picture of the layout of the market/region.  Outside of Wikipedia, this may make sense.  However, for the purposes of Wikipedia, so long as the stations are indicated as being in (or serving) the market/region, that is fine.  Cases where there are multiple stations on the same FM frequency (such as 91.5 FM in Boston) could use a little clarity, and I had been adding the city of license next to the frequency, which I think is helpful to both readers and editors. --DrChuck68 (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Newport template
For some reason, I thought that radio "regions" should not overlap (or in Newport's case, be completely inside of) a market. Technically, Newport stations are in the Providence market, and thus should be in its template, but I didn't want OR to come in with people saying "Oh it doesn't target Providence." That is why I included them in separate sections (same with Westerly, which despite being part of the Providence market, it's stations have never actually been put in its template, only New London's). Do you mind clearing this up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.30.139.25 (talk) 02:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Generally speaking, in many cases (not all) the region doesn't overlap an adjacent market. However, there are some cases where a region does have some overlap with an adjacent market.  If you look at Albany-Schenectady-Troy, there are station from nearby Saratoga County that have presence toward the south (see WDCD-FM).  However the Saratoga Springs/Glens Falls region has stations that are located too far north to make their presence known in the city of Albany (see WCQL).  Those two templates were already pre-existing (at least, before I started making edits), so there's no reason for the templates to be merged without any Consensus from other editors.  Providence and Newport are in a similar situation. --DrChuck68 (talk) 03:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

OK then. I also have been wondering, what are the (unofficial) boundaries of the Newport and.New London markets within Wikipedia, if you know what I mean? Could the North Conway-Fryeburg template made by a registered user (but deleted due to block evasion and being a sock) exist again? 2600:1000:B013:9676:4C52:A63F:BC69:DA5C (talk) 12:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Newport, I would think, includes anything within the county of Newport. New London includes southeastern Connecticut and a small part of southwest Rhode Island, for the RI stations that have presence in the New London area.  But this is just what I think, I can't speak for the other Wikipedia editors.  You may get better answers if you ask on the talk pages of the templates.  As for your other question, North Conway (NH) is in Carroll county, which Nielsen considers part of the Concord/Lakes Region market, and Fryeburg (ME) is in Oxford county, which Nielsen considers part of the Portland market.  What is notable about the North Conway-Fryeburg region?  I really don't know.  Again, this would be better asked on the talk pages of the templates to see if there is any consensus to make a new region, or leave things as-is. --DrChuck68 (talk) 02:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Northern and Downeast Maine template
The region is extremely broad. So should the template be split into "Presque Isle-Caribou Radio" and "Downeast Maine Radio" or something like that. On a related note, why was Portland/LA considered a nearby market? 2600:1000:B013:9676:4C52:A63F:BC69:DA5C (talk) 13:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Would the region be better organized if split? What regions/counties/cities does it actually cover?  I'd suggest taking that discussion to the talk page, and see if there is any consensus before making any major changes.  As for Portland and Lewiston-Auburn listed as nearby, that may have been an error on my part.  I've been using this map to see where the adjacent markets are (it's a fairly decent map, even if Lakes Region is spelled wrong).  Lincoln county is adjacent to the Portland market, and I wasn't sure if that county  was considered part of the "Downeast" region. --DrChuck68 (talk) 02:48, 22 February 2017 (UTC)