Talk:WHDH (TV)

"duopoly"

The word "duopoly" is used at the end of the History section of this article:

The sale was approved by the FCC in late November giving Boston its second television duopoly (the other is WBZ-TV and WSBK-TV).

In broadcasting, is this the common term to describe an owner owning 2 stations in the same market? In economics, at least, this is not what Duopoly means--it means a market with only two sellers/producers--i.e., not a monopoly (one electric company for a city), but, say, only 2 television stations in a city, owned by separate owners. --Mightyhal 06:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The use of duopoly (broadcasting) to refer to a twinstick operation (ownership of two stations in one market) is not common except in the US and the definition of the term is confusingly incompatible with duopoly (economics). I've tried to disambiguate these to duopoly (broadcasting) but it seems many individual station articles are affected. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 05:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

WNAC 1977-82 logo

Does anyone know the font used in the last of the WNAC logos? (the one on the Old Sturbridge ad). if so, I may be able to make a re-creation for the logo gallery. - EmiOfBrie 22:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Being well over a year later, i'm not sure if you (EmiofBrie) are going to read this, but there were two additional "7" logos for WNAC between 1977 ans 1982. The one in use from 1977-80 was the the fancy "7" in that New Roman font. The very last logo of the RKO General years was a strip-layered "7" (with lines completely running through the shape of the 7). I could try and track down this font, and if you respond I can create my own rendition of what WNAC's 1980-82 identity looked like. -numbaonestunna —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.235.35 (talk) 16:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

"7 NBC"?

Granted, I haven't lived in Massachusetts since 1998, but at the time I left, WHDH was branding itself "7 NBC". Has that changed? As for the "circle 7 with peacock" logo, scroll to the bottom of WHDH's website to the copyright notice....there's the aforementioned logo  :) - EmiOfBrie 23:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Well I think that should be up for debate, that could be just a generalized logo that doesn't make it on air. --CFIF (talk to me) 23:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

It has been on the air, at least it was back in 1998...I just don't know if it's still being used today. Can someone from Massachusetts clear this up? - EmiOfBrie 23:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I live in Massachusetts and it is still called "7 NBC" with non-news programming. The station also uses the Circle 7 logo with a peacock as well with non-news promotions and programming. 72.155.135.227 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You are such a liar, your IP comes up to Atlanta, Georgia. --CFIF (talk to me) 14:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't necessarily mean anything...he could be on vacation Wiki'ing from a cyber-cafe for all we know. But I see your point. We need to be sure. I'm half-tempted to actually call WHDH and get this straightened out once and for all. - EmiOfBrie 15:40, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I decided to called the station myself (617-725-0777) this morning and talked to a secretary and a news producer. They both did say they call themselves both "7 NBC" & "7 News". Leonard23 10:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

UPDATE - my best friend from Massachusetts will watch WHDH in prime time tonight and find out...we should get our answer soon. - EmiOfBrie 15:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I found some more logos with the Circle 7 with the NBC peacock but this time with the actual station ID. Image:7NBC.gif Image:Whdh boston ch7.jpg Image:7NBC.jpg Leonard23 9:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Here's a press release dated 2002 from Suffolk University that discusses a partnership with the station called it both "7 NBC" (station) and its news product "7 News". I also did an internet search of all things WHDH on Ask.com and nearly every single thing called the station "7NBC" before it called it "7 News". 9:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm starting to get worried, as this debate over the logo has spread to another article (at least, the one between CFIF (talk · contribs) and Leonard23 (talk · contribs)). It's turning into a sort of a revert war. I'm mostly neutral, but the 7NBC brand and related logo does appear to be in use (although 7NBC has not been used as often as it once was). I just don't want this to get out of hand, or request admin intervention. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Well he's gone the way of CoolKatt and is now calling my edits vandalism. The WSVN logo this guy insists on using blows. It really does. --CFIF (talk to me) 17:16, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Compare: 100px to Image:WSVN.png. The second one is of poor quality, and the first one is better quality. --CFIF (talk to me) 17:18, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Since this isn't the first time this has occured with you and another user that tells you and other people something. If the logo blows are not, its the station's official logo. Since you live in Florida, why don't you call WSVN and tell them to drop the Image:WSVN.png logo with their calls then. I'm not about to go through a revert war over a stupid logo. I'll just have an administrator lock the page from being edited and be done with it. It is very childish of you to go back and forth with me over something so simple. Leonard23 12:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Really? Then show me clear evidence on their site to show that this is their official logo. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Here. [[1]] Are you happy now? Leonard23 1:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

No, not really. How about some evidence that this is actually used on air? I bet you can get one of your sockpuppets to confirm it for you. --CFIF (talk to me) 18:28, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

See, that just proves how childish you are. I've proved you wrong, but you're so childish and petty that you just can't accept that you are wrong. Maybe you should think twice before karma causes http://www.flnewscenter.com to get shut down again with more threats of lawsuits from E.W. Scripps, Media General, or some other corporation. Have a nice day. Leonard23

Excuse me, but I regularly post there. You need to learn WP:CIVIL. CFIF (talk to me) 18:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I know I'm about a week late to this discussion, but from what I can tell from here (in Canada, but a place where WHDH is on the cable system), there are three versions of the logo used on the air:

• the 7NEWS logo used during newscasts and news promos (the NEWS can be either under the circle-7 or to the right) - this is the most-often seen version of the logo on the air
• the network-fed logo that pops up during NBC promos and returns from breaks during network programming - same as above, with "WHDH" instead of "NEWS"
• a version similar to the one currently in the article - this is the least-used, usually only seen in ads for events sponsored by channel 7 or local promos for syndicated shows.

The name "7NBC" is rarely used anymore, usually only by anchors when referring to other shows ("he'll be on the Tonight Show, right after this newscast on 7NBC.") Other promos just say "7" ("Access Hollywood, tonight at 7 on 7.")

The only constant in their logo branding is the circle-7 itself. I'm not taking sides in the logo debate, but just keep what I said in mind. Kirjtc2 15:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Ansin

The article references "Ansin" in 2 places, but never gives a full name or link. JimmB 22:05, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The 8/16 "Meltdown" and persistant vandalism

Someone has been repeatedly removing the paragraph regarding the 11PM News "Meltdown". I have no choice but to lock the article due to persistant vandalism. If you have reasons why you want it gone, say so. Else, leave it alone. -- azumanga 04:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. -- azumanga 05:12, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Rumor of WHDH owner Ed Ansin buying WLVI

Even though this article is locked, an addition should be made about the rumor of Ed Ansin trying to buy WLVI from Tribune according to http://www.fybush.com/NERW/2006/060821/nerw.html#ma. Sam 04:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

It is a rumor, so it dosen't seem notable from a historical point of view (see Wikipedia:Recentism). Besides that, I have requested this page for unprotection because the "meltdown" dispute seems nonexistant right now. —Whomp t/c 01:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Promotional articles on Wikipedia

This article, particularly the bottom half, sure looks like promotion. I thought this was against Wiki Policy?

Syrenab 15:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Logos

To 70.248.6.21: You are a fucking idiot. Its not an advertisement, its a fact of the station's past that some people may know. I am going to revert. Go find a new hobby!!!! I hate Bostonians who care less about packaging where other markets care. Will completely revert. Steven312 22:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Steven312, Are you an official moderator? You seem to use lots of insults on people, and call them "idiots" and "retards" every time they do something you don't agree with. You also like to threaten to block people for making edits that you do not agree with (which is something we are all free to do). If you don't like something, just edit it back. But your behavior does not seem like something that the managers of Wikipedia.org would sanction. Am I correct?

By the way, do you realize that many many of us have the same IP address? That's because IP addresses are always changing. Many of us are on routers. So if you think you are sending a message to and then blocking one person, you would actually be blocking many of us, and who gives you the right to do that?

Anyone else having trouble with this guy? Garyboroda 02:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use criteria

The use of images not in compliance with our fair-use criteria or our policy on nonfree content is not appropriate, and the images have been removed. Please do not restore them. — Moe ε 20:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:7NBC.jpg

Image:7NBC.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The ENTIRE 11PM news team gets axed!

http://www.tvweek.com/blogs/tvbizwire/2009/02/bostons_whdh_axes_11_pm_news_t.php

http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2009/02/13/plunge_from_top_of_ratings_brings_shake_up_at_ch_7/

Their ratings failure and such a sweeping change in on-air talent warrants mentioning. I scanned the article a couple of times but didn't see it mentioned.

Macshill (talk) 13:01, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

transmitter location

Did the transmitter location change, from analog to digital? What is the history of the transmitter locations? -96.233.19.33 (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

channel 42 to 7 to 42 transition debacle

Now that the 2009 digital transition frequency change debacle has been patched over (temporarily) by simulcasting on both channel 7 and channel 42, what is the chance that they'll change to 42 for good, so that users will not have to rescan to get the WHDH signal, and so that they won't be the only station in Boston requiring a VHF antenna? -96.233.19.33 (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

"WHDH transmits from a 1062-foot-tall (324 m) self-supporting tower on Tower Road in Newton Upper Falls, just north of Needham Street. WHDH operates on digital channel 42 under program test authority with an average ERP of 948 kW using a Dielectric TFU-24GBH-R antenna mounted 298 meters (978 feet) above ground (288 meters above average terrain). In May, 2010, WHDH applied to increase its average ERP to 1000 kW, using the same antenna...

WHDH-TV completed its transition to digital television on June 12, 2009, at 11:59 p.m. Prior to the transition, WHDH-TV operated on analog channe 7 with 316 kW peak visual ERP, from 306 meters (1000 ft) above average terrain, using a horizontally-polarized Dielectric TWB9-7 traveling-wave antenna with 0.75 degrees of electrical beam tilt; after the transition, WHDH-TV used 29.7 kW average ERP from the same antenna. WHDH-TV's transitional digital service operated at 948 kW average ERP on channel 42, from 288 meters AAT.

After the transition, however, the station began receiving numerous complaints from viewers who were unable to receive the DTV channel 7 signal. WHDH-TV quickly received Special Temporary Authority to reactivate the channel 42 signal, which in a stroke of luck was still available; in September of 2009, the station applied for a construction permit to move permanently back to channel 42, which was granted a few weeks later. An application for a license to cover the construction permit was filed in December, 2010, and remains pending before the FCC.

In July, 2010, WHDH-TV offically dropped the “-TV” suffix from its callsign." http://www.bostonradio.org/stations/72145 -71.174.181.150 (talk)

Significant trimming of Former Staff section

I just cut everyone out of the alumni section that does not have their own Wikipedia page or have a reference to establish their notability. This is the current consensus procedure, based on discussions at WP:WikiProject Television Stations and at [the Village Pump]. The rationales are as follows:

1. Most importantly, per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is "not an indiscriminate collection of information." As that section describes, just because something is true, doesn't necessarily mean the info belongs in Wikipedia.
2. Secondarily, per WP:V, we cannot include information that is not verifiable and sourced. I'm not certain how it would even be possible to source this information.
3. Per WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.

All of the people with their own pages are notable enough to appear on this list. However, if you look at pages about companies in general, you will not find mention of previous employees, except in those cases where the employee was particularly notable. Even then, the information is not presented just as a list of info, but is incorporated into the text itself (for example, when a company's article talks about the policies a previous CEO had, or when they mention the discovery/invention of a former engineer/researcher).

Two of the people I deleted (Teri Adler and Linda Blackman) had what appeared to be references, but were in fact just links to corporate sites. As those don't count as reliable references, they were also removed. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:04, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

To the person trying to re-add Delores Handy

Please do not add that person to this list. Per the above policies, we need to ensure that this list is accurate, that they qualify as "notable alumni", and that the information is verified. Current consensus says that to meet those criterion you need either a reliable source or the person needs to have their own Wikipage. This is a necessary step to keep the lists from growing indefinitely, and for us to be able to assure that the people actually worked at the station (otherwise, it's very easy to just add random names with no verification). If you for some reason disagree with this interpretation of policy, please explain here rather than just re-adding the information to the page. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:32, 31 August 2010 (UTC)