Talk:WTGS

WTGS has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: April 6, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Television: Stations Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Television stations task force (assessed as Low-importance).

GA review

Passed. Locust member (talk) 00:08, 6 April 2025 (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:WTGS/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 19:28, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Locust member (talk · contribs) 17:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is quite local so I figure I'll give this a review! Locust member (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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:
· · ·

serving as the Fox affiliate for the Savannah, Georgia, area - I believe the comma after "Georgia" can be removed
- Not done MOS:GEOCOMMA
  - Didn't know about this. Thanks!
Sea of blue issue with unincorporated Chatham County, Georgia - "unincorporated" is not seen anywhere in the article, just a mention of Chatham County. Can it be discarded?
- Definitely.
Lowcountry can be linked in lead
could we specify Charleston, South Carolina, so the reader knows which city we are referring to, without needed to click the wikilink?
Why does dozens need to be in quotations?
The article's sole image is in public domain due to not reaching the threshold of originality; rationale looks good
As I am unfamiliar with this genre of articles I'm not sure what I could do as a reviewer to increase broadness, but this looks good scope-wise (when comparing it to your endless other GAs)
Copyvio is insanely low at 2.0%. Passes easily
The article is written from NPOV. No issues at WP:WORDSTOWATCH
Mark [38] as dead (address is no longer up)
References all seem fine.
Stability is more than passable

Spot-check

Plantation Cablevision also denied having wanted WTGS to pay for access to its cable system. [10]
The new ownership moved the station's facilities south from Hardeeville to a site in Chatham County, Georgia, which would not be limited by height restrictions on a tower and be more centrally located for advertising sales purposes. [20]
(equivalent to $5,039 in 2021) - not seeing this in [1] (since it is from 1987) and the year is four years outdated.
- The way that inflation templates work is a bit different. There is a missing standard footnote, and I have changed it to use the latest available year, which is 2023, and automatically update.
During Super Bowl XLVIII, WTGS notably aired a two-minute long advertisement by local personal injury lawyer Jamie Casino, which featured a thriller-styled retelling of how he stopped representing "cold-hearted villains" to avenge the shooting death of his brother Michael Biancosino in 2012, culminating with Casino digging through a grave with a sledgehammer. The ad gained media attention following the game as a viral video, and while the station did not provide exact numbers, a WTGS spokesperson stated that the ad was its most expensive advertising sale in history. - both refs here look good
Taking good faith for references I cannot access.

@Sammi Brie: and @Wizzito: Nice work here! I am putting this review On hold for now. I have very limited issues with this article's current state. Let me know once you have implemented the changes. Locust member (talk) 15:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Locust member: Just made most of the changes. The one I did not do is an MOS:GEOCOMMA issue and correct as is. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 16:46, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, everything looks great now and am happy to ✓ Pass this! Locust member (talk) 00:07, 6 April 2025 (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.