This review is transcluded from Talk:WTVZ-TV/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tails Wx (talk · contribs) 22:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on this article, and I'm happy to start my second review on it! I'll review this throughout the next few days. :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 22:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   0% according to Earwig!

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Good work on this article! I've got a few comments below:

• I spotchecked nine random sources, all but one verified. The only that didn't verify was the first source in WTVZ-TV#TVX ownership, "In 1976, the Television Corporation of Virginia was formed in response to what its backers perceived as the need for another television station in the Norfolk area." The provided source doesn't mention the name of the the Television Corporation of Virginia, in which it states "Planning for WTVZ began when a group of area men decided the area was ready for a new TV station...". I don't think the source fully verifies the content in the article above.
  • Fixed with an additional citation call. An odd one because the company's name is in literally every other pre-1980/81 reference.
• In the same section above, "Armed with an agreement"–how about "After settling with an agreement"?
• In WTVZ-TV#MyNetworkTV affiliation, "Sinclair entered into an agreement to acquire Tribune Media—which at the time was the operator of WTKR and WGNT—in 2017." – why not re-word it to "In 2017, Sinclair entered into an agreement to acquire Tribune Media—which at the time was the operator of WTKR and WGNT."?
  • Above two done.
• The one image in the article, File:WTVZ-TV logo.svg, does not have proper copyright or licensing information, despite being in the public domain.
  • Wow, weird one here. A now-blocked user uploaded it as non-free, but it's below TOO. Fixed the tagging mismatch.

That's all I got! Courtesy ping Sammi Brie. :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Tails Wx: Should have fixed the above. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:47, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Sammi Brie, happy to promote! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]