Jump to content

Talk:CIII-DT

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

Template creep

[edit]

Too many navigational templates at the bottom of this article. We need to somehow make that section a little more friendly.  Denelson83  05:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Global Confusion

[edit]

I've never understood Global. Global TV in Ottawa advertizes itself as "Ontario's source for news", but I have yet to see a Global reporter leave the greater Toronto area. A double-murder in Ottawa would (and has) gone unreported while "Ontario's source for news" reports on street sweepers in Toronto. Every anchor, reporter, and advertisement is very careful to use the word "Ontario" and never the word "Toronto", which seems very disingenuous. Anchors routinely use terms like "in THE city", as if Toronto is the only city in Ontario. Global is completely devoted imparting the virtues of the glorious Toronto Maple Leafs. Even traffic and weather reports are branded as being for Ontario despite being solely for Toronto.

The only reports from Ottawa are in relation to the federal government. Ottawa is a city with a metropolital area of over a million people, most of whom have nothing to do with the government. (The largest employer is the high-tech sector, followed by the service industry). I don't think any Global news reporter has ever wandered away from the parliament buildings. There's a lot of news here, and Global seems pretty clueless.

It wouldn't bother me so much if Global was more honest about their true market. CityTV for example is also Toronto-centric, but is quite honest about the fact that it's by Toronto, for Toronto. Global news seems to want the market share of an Ontario-wide news resource, without investing the resources to make it happen. --70.81.251.32 23:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Toronto translator the main station?

[edit]

Does anyone know if CIII sends its signal to the Toronto translator (channel 41) first, rather than to the "main" Paris one? Was wondering because CKMI-TV sends its signal to its Montreal translator first rather than the nominal main transmitter in Quebec City.Blueboy96 19:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto is HDTV, Paris is not (as it is still analogue-only). There is therefore no way to operate Toronto as a pure repeater of the Paris station without killing any HD or DTV-specific functionality. I've updated this much; I'm also very inclined to remove the unsourced nonsense about CIII-DT-41 staying on its current UHF 65 position after analogue shutdown. Odds are, anything outside the 2-51 range of "core channels" (or more realistically 7-51, given the DTV impulse noise debacle) isn't going to stay on those frequencies after digital transition is complete as this bandwidth is being taken away from TV broadcasting for mobile providers. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 03:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Until CIII-TV-41 shuts down it's analog transmitter and CIII-DT-41 flashcuts to Ch. 41, it would be irresponsible to say that CIII-TV-41 would be moving back to Ch. 41. At least the channel 65 assignment is in the Industry Canada database. Emarsee (Talk • Contribs) 04:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This article currently purports that "After the analog television shutdown and digital conversion, which is tentatively scheduled to take place on August 31, 2011, CIII-TV-41 will continue digital broadcasts on its current pre-transition channel number, 65." CIII-TV-41 legally cannot continue on 65 after this is over, as that channel will be reallocated for non-television use. SpectrumDirect.ic.gc.ca as a source only tells us that the station is allocated UHF 65 now, not that it has (or can even apply for) UHF 65 post-transition. CIII-TV-41 must turn off analogue in 2011 and move its digital signal in-core: if not to 41, then to another channel in the 2-51 range. The article text as it stands legally makes no sense. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 08:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The image Image:Global original.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the name of the article

[edit]

Since the CRTC has changed the COL of CIII from Paris to Toronto, wouldn't the article be renamed CIII-TV-41, since CIII-TV is now a translator of CIII-TV-41.  єmarsee  • Speak up! 04:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree in principle, but I'd be hesitant to do a move immediately since Canwest might use this opportunity to make the Toronto transmitter CIII-TV (and the Paris transmitter something else, say CIII-TV-1)... or maybe not. We'll know within a few weeks. In any event, "CIII-TV" remains the base call sign for most of the transmitters, so the article title isn't entirely invalid. — stickguy (:^›)— || talk || 00:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the Toronto transmitter actually had a different base call sign (i.e. the CIII part) from the Paris transmitter, I'd agree that the article should be moved. But if the only difference is the number suffix, I don't think it's particularly important to actually do so. Firstly, it's true that Canwest may flip the call signs at a later date, which would leave us having to move the article back again anyway. And secondly, the move wouldn't actually add anything of great value to the article beyond datageekery for the sake of datageekery; most Wikipedia users have absolutely no clue about the -41 suffix, so the move's only real value would be as a technicality with no genuinely meaningful significance.
The call sign rule was meant to forestall using a branding like "Global Ontario" as our article title. I don't think it was ever meant to be applied so strictly and invariably that we would have to move an article from "CIII-TV" to "CIII-TV-41" just because of a licensing technicality that merely reflected what was already functionally true about the station's operations anyway. Bearcat (talk) 17:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The CRTC ownership chart lists CIII as CIII-TV-41 and CKMI as CKMI-TV-1: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/ownership/cht14A.pdf Also, if Canwest was going to change the call letters they probably would've done it by now, since it's been almost a year. --Noname2 (talk) 19:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

22 in Cottam blank during US shows?

[edit]

According to the article, the channel 22 transmitter in Cottam went blank when an American show was televised. However, according to a 7/20/1974 TV Guide listing at Radio-Info, channel 22, as well as 29 in Oil Springs, showed an alternate program, "Country Matters", while the rest of Global's network saw "Apple's Way", a CBS program. Did Global provide alternate programming early on before deciding it would be better just to black it out? Or did they always provide an alternate program? -- azumanga (talk) 16:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Global Toronto changed frequency

[edit]

Global Toronto (UHF 41) has officially changed its signal from UHF 41 to UHF 17. The virtual channel is still 41.1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.136.46 (talk) 02:32, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CIII-DT. 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) 15:07, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on CIII-DT. 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) 03:12, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CIII-DT. 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) 01:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DT11

[edit]

I see someone has been re-inserting this false statement:

It is unclear what Industry Canada will now use VHF channel 11, the spectrum that had been allocated for CIII-TV-2 digital, for.

This is nonsense. Corus' refusal to move CKWS-DT is tying up the channel, per https://services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/DocWebBroker/OpenDocument.aspx?AppNo=2020-0195-7 - so CIII can't move to eleven. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.87.40 (talk) 16:51, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Corus made it clear that they were not transitioning CIII-2 to digital TV and elected to instead broadcast CIII-2 on a sub-channel of it's Kingston transmitter. This is why CKWS remained on DT11. This was approved by the CRTC (broadcast decision 2020-391). The Bancroft transmitter was shuttered in September 2022 and CIII-2 is now broadcasting from the CKWS-DT transmitter in Kingston on one of its sub channels. TV's display it as 2.1Bigoranget (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:CIII-DT&oldid=1200911685"