Wikipedia:Peer review/FCC fines of The Howard Stern Show/archive1

FCC fines of The Howard Stern Show
This peer review discussion has been closed.

I have listed this article for peer review because I would like some guidance on how to develop it to GA status. I think it is on the right track, but it does need some tweaking (grammar, quality prose, another suitable image maybe? etc.) to get there. I am horrible at writing leads, so I will consider looking at available volunteers, and willing editors, to help out. Also, could the article be rated in terms of current quality grade and importance? Or does the Wiki Project Radio do that?

Thanks, LowSelfEstidle (talk) 08:49, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Very brief comment: You need to make it clear in the first paragraph of the lead that the focus of this article is the fines paid by the show. The inclusion of the ambiguous words "fine history" does not of itself make it obvious what the article is about. Brianboulton (talk) 23:50, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, no fines were paid by the show. They were paid by the owners of radio stations that carried the program (and were cited in the fine). I was not sure on any other titles. Thanks for the note :) LowSelfEstidle (talk) 08:09, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I agree with the above comment, here are some more suggestions for improvement. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:33, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The lead does not really follow WP:LEAD and needs to be revised. According to WP:LEAD The article should begin with a declarative sentence telling the nonspecialist reader what (or who) is the subject. but fines are not even mentioned in the first sentence, and the current first sentence talks about Stern's Sirius XM show, which cannot be fined by the FCC by law.
 * WP:LEAD also says The first paragraph should define the topic without being overly specific. but fines are not even mentioned in the first paragraph.
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. As such, nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. However Sirius XM is only mentioned in the lead. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
 * While refs in the lead are allowed, the lead should either be cited just like the rest of the article (everything cited) or (more commonly) as summary, does not need refs since these are repeated in the body of the article (except for direct quotations and extraordinary claims). The article currently cites one sentence and should either cite everything or just let the refs be in the text.
 * The language is OK, but could use a copyedit to clean up some rough spots. For example the subject of this sentence The Communications Act of 1934 and First Amendment laws limited the agency's power to take further action, and thus employed a "hands-off" approach.[7] is the Act and laws, but the second clause seems to be about the agency and is thus unclear.
 * Another problem in this sentence Stern and his show gained national recognition in the 1990s while on terrestrial radio, gaining a peak audience of 20 million listeners to as many as 60 markets across the United States and Canada. people listen to stations and live in radio markets, so it should either be "listeners in as many as 60 markets" or "listeners to as many as 60 stations"
 * I think the article needs to distinguish between fines levied and fines paid better.
 * It should also explain discrepancies - in the "Super Bowl XXXVIII aftermath (2004)" section it says On March 18, the FCC proposed a $27,500 fine to Viacom for sexual and scatological discussions from a Stern broadcast on WKRK in Detroit from July 26, 2001.[6] The fine was settled on November 23, when Viacom agreed to a payment of $3.5 million to the FCC, the largest settlement with federal regulators.[54] How do you go from $27,500 to $3.5 million??
 * Is it also possible to explain why the same broadcast was fined in some markets, but not others? Seems odd.
 * Internet references need date accessed added.
 * This File:Howard 100 News Team, Winter 2005-2006.jpg image might be used at the end for the move to satellite radio. Not sure if there are images of the FCC commissioners, but might be worth checking.
 * See also is generally for articles not already linked in this article - the Super Bowl Halftime controversey article is already linked in the body
 * I also wonder if the title is the best - what if it were "History of FCC fines of the Howard Stern Show" or just "FCC fines of the Howard Stern Show"?


 * Many thanks for your time in reviewing the article. Much appreciated! LowSelfEstidle (talk) 12:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)