Talk:Hits Radio South Yorkshire

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hallam FM. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140226043206/http://www.bauermedia.co.uk/press/news/article/indemand-returns-with-new-host to http://www.bauermedia.co.uk/press/news/article/indemand-returns-with-new-host

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) 11:13, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Presenters

I've removed the presenters that don't have articles as obviously they're non notable - The non notables do have articles however YouTube, LinkedIn, BlogSpot, hallammemories, family-announcements.co.uk, sheffieldhistory.co.uk (forums) are not wp:reliable sources,
In short if they don't have articles then they shouldn't be included here as as demonstrated here we have all these presenters backed up with non RS.
Also I'd completely forgot about the discussion above and it should probably be ignored ... –Davey2010^Talk 21:51, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

A Dispute Resolution Notice request was filed by myself, dated 5 June, 2014, in regards to 'Notable Presenters'. User: 'Doniago' mediated and this was their advice:

"As far as sourcing goes, I'd just recommend reviewing WP:RS. You don't necessarily need to provide citations, strictly speaking, but I would recommend that approach. I don't think pictures you take would be considered reliable sources...I'd recommend reviewing the link and checking at the reliable sources noticeboard if you have more questions about that. Unfortunately forums or other sites that publish user-generated content (other wikis, IMDb, non-professional blogs) also are not considered reliable sources. Basically the source needs to have been through some sort of editorial review process. There's more to it then that, but based on some of what you said I thought it appropriate to put that in the open here. If either of you or anyone else working on the article feels that the list is getting too long while staying up to standards, moving it to its own article would be a possibility. I'd just recommend reviewing WP:LIST before taking that step, and ideally I'd get a consensus to break it out on ie article's Talk page before you do so. If all of this works for you and you're comfortable with this discussion being closed, please confirm below. Otherwise please let me know what your remaining concerns are and we'll keep the case open for the time-being. Thank you both for your prompt responses, and civility towards and willingness to work with each other! It's been a pleasure working with you! DonIago (talk) 00:41, 7 June 2014 (UTC)."

The dispute was resolved and 'Davey2010', in Revision History: 13:01, 7 June 2014‎ Davey2010 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (11,684 bytes) (+3,404)‎ . . (Reinserted Past Presenters list per DRN).

The Presenters removed were the backbone of Radio Hallam from its inception in 1974. The sources cited were from reliable sources ie The Sheffield Star newspaper, internet website: hallammemories - which was set up by a former Radio Hallam presenter, Michael Lindsay, who was involved in the station right from the beginning, and was not simply a 'radio presenter'. Other citations linked to genuine radio recordings ie of Roger Moffat. There were genuine official photos of former presenters linked to, for verification of these presenters.

Only reliable sources were cited.

Roger Moffat; Ray Stuart; Johnny Moran; Beverley Chubb; Kelly Temple; Mike Rouse; Ian Rufus; Dave Kilner - these presenters were the mainstay of the station and CANNOT be ignored. They were 'Radio Hallam' full stop! To say otherwise makes a mockery of Wikipedia.

Unfortunately, I have no choice but to file another Dispute Resolution Notice request, as the 'Notable Presenter's' issue has obviously not been resolved.

The article needs to be accurate and also be fair on big name presenters who graced the station way back, when the station was known as Radio Hallam. These presenters were literally the cornerstone of the station and to not recognise their contribution to the station is denying a true and accurate picture of those who tirelessly worked there back then in the 1970's and 80's.

There really is no point in talking further here to attempt to resolve this, as this has failed previously back in 2014. Butdavid (talk) 18:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Butdavid - Do you have a link to this 2014 DRN as I'd completely forgot all about it, I will say tho times change and so does consensus - Articles with presenters are commonly removed if they don't have articles regardless of whether they're sourced or not,

I don't mean this in any disrespectful way but to our readers presenters mean nothing especially when like here they have no articles and thus are unknown to the 99.9% of our readers,

Anyway if you could provide a link to this DRN I'll take a look, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Davey2010 - With respect, I feel it is best that I raise a DRN request on this. Sadly, I have no trust in you as an editor, as I feel that you behave deviously. You remove things or close threads when you shouldn't ie when I previously talked about this issue of 'notable presenters' on the talk page in 2014. It appears that that discussion has been totally removed from the talk page as well. You seem to conveniently forget about things. I shall have to put in a DRN in the next few days in regards to this issue and how I feel your behaviour is not acceptable. Butdavid (talk) 19:52, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Butdavid - That was in 2014 and I myself will admit those discussions were crap and I should've done things better however in my defense I was more or less a newbie back then and as can be seen in the archives I tried dealing with it the best I could at the time - Obviously times have changed as have I,

In regards to "conveniently forgetting about things" - Not the case at all- I simply cannot remember every minor thing that has happened on this place especially when it was 3-4 years ago! (I've enmassed nearly 80 thousand edits since 2014 so obviously I cannot remember everything), inregards to forgetting about adding the presenters twice - I would've been removing them from various articles and again in my defense when I realised my error I self reverted and came here[1],

Inregards to "being devious" - Again not the case - The discussions were a mess and clogged up a good chunk of the talkpage however (they can still be accessed above),

As for DRN - Those discussions aren't DRNs, You may want to see WP:DRN, WP:30 or start an WP:RFC,

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:20, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Davey2010 - I need to inform you of the Dispute Resolution I have raised at: [2]. Butdavid (talk) 13:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Commented, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:03, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Came here to look after seeing the DRN post. Imho Davey is correct. The solution is to write articles for the presenters that do not have articles of their own, if indeed they are notable. if no WP:RS can be found to support such articles, then ... -Roxy the dog. barcus 15:36, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Roxy the dog is right. See below. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:32, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon thanks. It was a drive by comment, but I find myself adamant on this, and that surprises me. Why only today I deleted a list of over a hundred languages, all wikilinked, that was there taking up space.you might wanna sign below. -Roxy, Zalophus californianus. barcus 21:30, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Following on from some hi-jinx at the "Notable Past Presenters" section, I have checked all the entries thoroughly and removed those that were unverifiable either in this article, from sources in this article and in linked WP:BLPs. I have also added some "CN" tags to linked articles. The list as it stands now is verifiable (WP:V). Please make sure that any additions to the list maintain this required standard for notable presenters. Thanks. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 11:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Comment on Lists

Following discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard, I have a general comment about names in lists. If a person does have an article, it is true that that indicates that they are considered notable. (Lack of notability is a reason, the most common reason. to delete an article via Articles for Deletion.) However, there can be people who do not have articles who are nonetheless thought to be notable. That is the case if an article would be appropriate but has not yet been written about the person. In such a case, if their name is enclosed in brackets, it will be appear in red as a red link. That is a way of indicating that the writing of an article about the person is encouraged. So, we don't need to remove names because articles don't exist. We can instead decide that the article should exist and list the name in red as an encouragement to write the article. (To be sure, if an article contains too many redlinks, it both looks sloppy and tends to indicate that names are being overlinked.) Robert McClenon (talk) 02:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

I have warned Butdavid for edit warring and adding unencyclopeadic content (commentary) repeatedly. The next step is sanctions. Please stop adding unnacceptable content. Discuss here first. Thanks. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 11:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Further comment - On reading this page, I see that Butdavid has tried this nonsense a couple of years ago. The same result will ensue as before. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 11:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

I have not "tried this nonsense a couple of years ago", as you say. I went through the correct channel of Dispute Resolution in 2014 and 2017. I have warned you that I will have to do the same again unfortunately. If you have a dispute, then go through the correct channels, like I have done previously on two separate occasions now. We both have the same editing rights. You do not have any right to sanction me or warn me and I have no right to do the same with you. If you are not happy then please raise a dispute via the correct channel. Thank you. Butdavid (talk) 12:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Well what was the nonsense you instigated just up a bit on this page then? Rice pudding?

Please also learn to indent your posts correctly on Talk pages. I have done it for you this time. Did you read the warnings I gave you on your Talk page? I shall ask admins to prevent you editing in this way. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 12:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

I am a novice editor and have not edited for a long while. You have been as guilty as anyone in what is deemed as 'edit warring', which is totally unacceptable by any of us. I have been through two Dispute Resolutions, like I have said, over the past five years and both came to conclusions allowing red-linked presenters, to encourage articles to be written about them. Also, it was agreed that a presenter without an article to their name can be added so long as they are reliably sourced. I am not a professional editor, but do wish presenters that were very well known to be included in the 'notable presenter section.'

I would like to suggest removing this section, as it is obviously a contentious issue, as to what 'notable' actually means. Wikipedia, as far as I am aware, does not state that names can only be used or added if they have their own Wikipedia aricle to link to. My suggestion to you and other editors, is to possibly remove this section, as it has caused and is causing conflict of opinion and will continue to do so. Please let me know what your thoughts are on this suggestion of mine. I apologise if I don't know how to ident properly my posts. Many thanks.

Butdavid (talk) 13:55, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

if you cannot be bothered to follow our editing conventions on talk pages, and WP:PAG generally, do you think you should be allowed to edit the project at all? You’ve had plenty of time to learn. Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:18, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

When I post my comment, I am being advised the following:

"Note your reply will be automatically signed with your username."

I am attempting to be civil and use the Talk page correctly.

Please, likewise do the same, so that we can resolve our dispute here if at all possible.

Many thanks. Butdavid (talk) 14:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

But you’ve had ten years to learn this stuff. It’s basic good manners to behave properly and follow community rules and conventions. Pull your trousers up please. Now, with regard to your disruptive editing, is it your intention to continue on this disruptive path, or should Wikipedia prevent your disruption? Your choice. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)