Talk:WFXT

	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 Mid-importance).

United States: Massachusetts / Boston Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Low-importance).
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Boston (assessed as Low-importance).

Capitalization

Please let's *not* make this an edit war over capitalization, ok? Whether it says "FOX25" or "Fox 25" is irrelevent, since officially both are correct. -EmiOfBrie 21:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course though, the company prefers "FOX" CoolKatt number 99999 02:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my response at Talk:WNYW. Rollosmokes 07:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that makes my initial point: They are both officially correct, so there's no need for an edit war :) - EmiOfBrie 12:54, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My network TV

Since Boston doesn't have an MNTV affiliate yet, WFXT has said they will tentatively air the MNTV programming on weekday afternoons until such an affiliate is found. If that happens, does anyone think they may use the website logo as temporary station branding? - EmiOfBrie 00:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a discussion forum (not even talk pages). Nevertheless, no, I don't think so. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, my apologies... - EmiOfBrie 12:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

What's with the recent edits by an anon whose IP address keeps changing? These edits involve the infobox, as the anon is continuing to delete the logo and sometimes adds in the slogan field that their slogan is "The Most Powerful Name In Local News" (the slogan most of the other O&Os that have the new Fox O&O look have) -- but I don't see anything to support that WFXT uses that slogan, and the logo in the infobox is still in use in promotions for non-news programs and for community events that the station sponsors. Will there have to be some sort of action taken to fix this? --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:41, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Wfxt weather 2007.JPG

Image:Wfxt weather 2007.JPG 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 19:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Stephanos

I'm surprised there is not an article here on the popular anchor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.72.50.45 (talk) 14:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding unreferenced entries of former employees to lists containing BLP material

Hello, Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to the list of former employees in articles. Including this type of material in articles does not abide by current consensus and its inclusion is strongly discouraged in our policies and guidelines. The rationales are as follows:

WP:NOT tells us, Wikipedia is "not an indiscriminate collection of information." As that section describes, just because something is true, doesn't necessarily mean the info belongs in Wikipedia.
As per WP:V, we cannot include information in Wikipedia that is not verifiable and sourced.
WP:Source list tells us that lists included within articles (including people's names) are subject to the same need for references as any other information in the article.
Per WP:BLP, we have to be especially careful about including un-sourced info about living persons.

If you look at articles about companies in general, you will not find mention of previous employees, except in those cases where the employee was particularly notable. Even then, the information is not presented just as a list of names, but is incorporated into the text itself (for example, when a company's article talks about the policies a previous CEO had, or when they mention the discovery/invention of a former engineer/researcher). If a preexisting article is already in the encyclopedia for the person you want to add to a list, it's generally regarded as sufficient to support their inclusion in list material in another article. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 23:14, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cancellation of coverage on Dish Network

Dish Network and Apollo entered into dispute about 6 months ago and Dish Network tells their customers to get an over-the-air antenna to get it or download the FOX NOW App, via Roku, AmazonFire TV, Apple TV, Chomecast, XBoxOne, Google Play or Apple Appstore to get it. They refer to DishPromise.com for updates. On DishPromise, the company is listing competitors to WFXT for things like the Yahoo Sports app to cover Football that would normally air on Fox. CaribDigita (talk) 17:37, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]