Talk:Birth of public radio broadcasting

Birth of public radio broadcasting was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 15, 2020	Good article nominee	Listed
February 25, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 28, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the birth of public radio broadcasting* was a live concert from the Metropolitan Opera House with Enrico Caruso as one of the opera singers?*
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 13, 2011, January 13, 2014, January 13, 2018, and January 13, 2020.
Current status: Delisted good article

This orphaned talk page, subpage, image page, or similar is not eligible for speedy deletion under CSD G8 as it has been asserted to be useful to Wikipedia.
If you believe it should be deleted, please nominate it on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.

Radio NA‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

NA

This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Scope

Come on now, we don't even have an article for Early history of public radio broadcasting, or History public radio broadcasting, or even Public radio broadcasting, for that matter. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:52, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Public broadcasting and Timeline of radio#Audio broadcasting (1915 to 1950s) and Broadcast television would cover that.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:01, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

This article should surely be merged into the history part of Radio broadcasting and/or History of broadcasting. There isn't really anything here that justifies this as a stand alone topic. MapReader (talk) 23:26, 22 December 2017 (UTC)+[reply]

Couldn't agree more, and would like to add there were public radio broadcasts before this one, so the title is misleading.--Maarten1963 (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 March 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below; proposed title created as a redirect. Dekimasuよ! 06:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Birth of public radio broadcasting → Origin of public radio broadcasting – WP:RS, WP:NDESC. It seems odd to be referring to a nonliving abstract concept as having a "birth", whereas "Origin" is used in sources: Radio's Hidden Voice: The Origins of Public Broadcasting in the United States, Encyclopedia of Radio 3-Volume Set. Ribbet32 (talk) 06:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

comment: wikt:birth #3 A beginning or start; a point of origin.. I believe that also has the connotation of originating from a person, which is how the lead sentence here describes the topic. I could be convinced either way, just pointing out that the word isn't as inaccurate as one might think at first glance. --Netoholic @ 06:57, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Still informal and fairly slangish in my book; not encyclopedic IMO. Ribbet32 (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unless one is not familiar with the language, they would know that "birth" is commonly used to refer to the creation of inanimate objects and entities. For this reason I oppose as a needless move._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review

This article has passed its GA nomination --DannyS712 (talk) 04:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Birth of public radio broadcasting/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: DannyS712 (talk · contribs) 02:08, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Notes

Some sentences have a lot of references (eg ... a live Metropolitan Opera House performance by several famous opera singers. has 6, This event is regarded as the birth of public radio broadcasting. also has 6) - are all of these needed?

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Birth of public radio broadcasting#Transmitter - "The broadcast was also heard in Bridgeport, Connecticut." - how far away is that?

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Birth of public radio broadcasting#Transmitter - doesn't need its own sub section, only 1 line. See MOS:BODY

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Birth of public radio broadcasting#Other broadcasts - shouldn't have a section with only one subsection; suggest removing the subsection heading

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article doesn't seem to broadly cover the topic. There should be discussion of, eg, the historical significance (elaborate on This marked the beginning of what would become nearly universal wireless radio communication.), the immediate impacts, if any, etc

Done See new section on Immediate impact --Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:23, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

I have placed this review on hold pending resolution of the issues noted above --DannyS712 (talk) 02:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyS712: I have addressed all the issues. Can you take a look at it now. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Coldwell: I took a look; I still feel that the impact isn't quite clear - what impact did it have on things other than radio broadcast? Eg History of radar#Significance covers the impact radar had on World War II and modern science. Did public radio broadcasting lead to a new method of advertising? A new tool for propaganda? More access to news? If you can add something like that it would be great; if not, I'll do a final read through and finish the review. Thoughts? --DannyS712 (talk) 06:37, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyS712: Significance section added. Please take another look at it again. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Coldwell: Thanks for your work; lgtm, approving DannyS712 (talk) 04:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This orphaned talk page, subpage, image page, or similar is not eligible for speedy deletion under CSD G8 as it has been asserted to be useful to Wikipedia.
If you believe it should be deleted, please nominate it on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]