Jump to content

Talk:KCTV

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Midwestman1986 (talk | contribs) at 04:32, 11 January 2019 (→City on info box: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Userbox

KCTV
CBS		This user watches
KCTV 5/KSMO 62
in Kansas City.		KSMO
MyTV

If you watch KCTV/KSMO for your news source, here is the userbox you can display on your user page if you'd like. The code is {{User KCTV/KSMO-TV}}. Corkythehornetfan(talk) 01:20, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

This article indicates that the change from call letters KCMO to KCTV was tied to the TV 5 branding. I believe there was a feud with Kansas City Missouri City Hall when KCMO moved their offices to Kansas. The tower also had some additional lighting added to the tower at that time.

Starrymessenger (talk) 03:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kansas City Star - December 2, 2004 - E1

Live, late-breaking ... and the leader

In the first five minutes of this story, you'll learn the shocking details behind the TV station that toppled market leader KMBC! If that teaser sounds familiar, then you've probably been watching KCTV, Channel 5, lately. Join the crowd. For the first time in more than a decade, KCTV is sitting pretty atop the 10 p.m. Nielsen ratings at the end of a November sweeps month.

According to Neilsen Media Research, the 10pm news ratings look like this:

KCTV KMBC KSHB WDAF

KCTV has been #1 at 10pm sunce November, 2004.

I don't know where you are hearing that WDAF is #1 at 10pm, but that's just not true.

WDAF does lead the morning news ratings race.

KCTV is not the number one news station in Kansas City at 10. As a resident and native of Kansas City, I am sure that it is not number one- channel 4 (WDAF) claims that it has the number one at 10 slot. If you have further evidence, please show it here. So, until you do- then i will remove the phrase that says it has the number 1 news slot.

Both pages need to be merged and cleaned up a little bit. One only covers KCTV's recent history - the other needs much more information in general. Amnewsboy 19:30, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Chopper 5 / Sky Hawk 5

Well I found some information to be conflicting to what I know. Chopper 5 is the 2nd Chopper that KCTV has used the First one being Sky Hawk 5 which was used in the mid to late 1990's. KCTV 5 was the 2nd Station to have a chopper. But for some reaosn KCTV-5 got rid of this chopper went without one for a few years.

KCTV 5 logo and the leaked star wars holiday special

The KCTV 5 logo appears on a frequently leaked star wars holiday special video on the internet, should this be noted here?


Why should the competition (KMBC) post information on KCTV? It's here, and you can see the source on the TV blog on kansascity.com


ANSWER: What you removed was Channel-5!!!!!!! The section ended by showing the influence that Channel-5's FRIDAY FRIGHT NIGHT had other shows. Since when does mention of competition has become TABOO; so, by the rationale, Sir Isaac Newton should never have to endure the menion of Leibniz!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.21.21.116 (talk) 04:31, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kctv0588.jpg

Image:Kctv0588.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 15:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kcmo0571.jpg

Image:Kcmo0571.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 15:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding unreferenced entries of former employees to lists containing BLP material

Hello, Please do not add unreferenced or improperly referenced names as entries to the list of former employees in the article. Not including this type of material in articles abides by current consensus and is strongly discouraged in our policies and guidelines. The rationales are as follows:

  1. WP:NOT tells us, 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. As per WP:V, we cannot include information in Wikipedia that is not verifiable and sourced.
  3. WP:NLIST tells us that lists included within articles (including people's names) are subject to the same need for references as any other information in the article.
  4. Per WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.

If you look at articles 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 names, 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). thanks Deconstructhis (talk) 14:50, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ex-Employees

It is pointless to add any former employees as there are too many and it gets confusing and eventually people start messing with the add ons and put dates that are wrong and add more and more people or they condense a list to make the article look better. There isn't any reason to have just two ex-employees listed versus several either. The question then is why those two? Just a slippery slope I dealt with in trying to fix the site for a while. I tried to add as many people as I could recall and eventually it got too long. Then someone added dates to each employee that was either wrong or with question marks because they didn't know when they were at the station. Way too long and time consuming and if I have to start citing verification it would take hours. The station changes staff about every year anyways. Then people will want to put the ones who just left. It is a mess I will no longer deal with. I was just fixing the list that was there which had about 10 people about two years ago or more and every six months would add more people. I had the same problems with the CNN and MSNBC articles and we took out the list of former employees. I see they also took out the Fox News section as well.- User. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.166.101 (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit that I restored your removal of the section on sight primarily because you failed to utilize an edit summary when you performed the edit; not necessarily because I disagree with your rationale for doing so. If you fail to utilize an edit summary to give other editors a heads up on your intentions and point them to the talk page for your reasoning, it's quite easy to misread any substantial removal as a case of vandalism and deal with it accordingly. That being said; anyone who examines my edit history quickly learns that I'm not exactly a huge fan of unreferenced lists of former employees of television stations and believe that minimally entries should only be included if a pre-existing article exists for the individuals mentioned; ideally an entry should also include a reference indicating why the person being included is "notable" in terms of the subject of the article itself; the television station as per WP:NLIST and WP:V. I'm going to add an "unreferenced section" template to the material in question in order to provide those so inclined an opportunity to substantiate the notability of these two persons to KCTV; if substantiation is not provided in short order, I have no objection to removing the section itself. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 22:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Deal with Meredith and Time inc

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-meredith-time-inc-20171126-story.html

This proposed deal involves Time inc's assets and Meredith's assets coming into one entity. As of November 2017 the Koch Brothers has been named as people involved in the deal. Its a pending deal that affects Meredith owned stations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/business/dealbook/time-inc-meredith-corporation-koch-brothers.html?_r=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.86.14.44 (talk) 22:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on KCTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:50, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on KCTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on KCTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on KCTV. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:22, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on KCTV. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on KCTV. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:08, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

City on info box

I think it would be best if instead of Kansas City , Missouri we put “Kansas City MO-KS” which is the official name of the Kansas City metropolitan area. Or we just put Kansas City metropolitan area. Midwestman1986 (talk) 04:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:KCTV&oldid=877830755"