Talk:WOLB

A fact from WOLB appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 May 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that radio station WSID, located in a suburb of Baltimore, claimed that a city court had no jurisdiction over it?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/WOLB.

Wikipedia

Radio Stations Low‑importance

	Radio portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio Stations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of radio stations 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.Radio StationsWikipedia:WikiProject Radio StationsTemplate:WikiProject Radio StationsRadio station articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Maryland: Baltimore Low‑importance

	Maryland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland 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.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Baltimore Task Force.

Fair use rationale for Image:WOLB-AM.gif[edit]

Image:WOLB-AM.gif 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 04:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of WSID into WOLB[edit]

WSID and WOLB are the same license; we generally try to keep a station's entire history within the same article. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I would like to see some more sources for the WSID part, which shouldn't be hard with AmericanRadioHistory.com. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:23 on April 16, 2020 (UTC) • #StayAtHome

Support and I'm on it. Raymie (t • c) 03:58, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 17:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that radio station WSID, located in a suburb of Baltimore, claimed a city court had no jurisdiction over it~~—and won~~? Sources: [1], p86

Reviewed: Nutrition Technologies
Comment: Might be a bit at the end of this one in terms of dates...cutting it close.

5x expanded by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 05:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Nominated within seven days of expansion and is long enough. QPQ has been done. Article is neutral, reliably cited and not a copyright violation. Hook is fascinating, neutral and concise. GTG. MWright96 (talk) 17:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came by to promote this, but the station didn't "win" the fact that the court had no jurisdiction over it; it was found not guilty and left off the case. I think the hook wording needs to be adjusted. Perhaps end the hook at over it? Yoninah (talk) 16:37, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoninah: Just did that. Raymie (t • c) 17:06, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Restoring tick per MWright96's review. Yoninah (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]