Talk:CBUVT

CBUVT 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: June 2, 2020. (Reviewed version).

A fact from CBUVT appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation left a studio building in British Columbia unfinished in 1978, only to move in 34 years later?

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/CBUVT.

Wikipedia

Canada: British Columbia / Television / The 10,000 Challenge Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian television.
	This article was created or improved during The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada, which started in November 2016 and is ongoing. You can help!!

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 articles
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).

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:22, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

The CHEK-TV/CBC Radio studio building in Victoria

... that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation left a studio building in Victoria, British Columbia (pictured) unfinished in 1978, only to move in 34 years later? Source: [1] [2]
- ALT1:... that Canadian federal budget cuts scrapped plans for a CBC Television station in Victoria, British Columbia (building pictured), even though it was just months away from completion? Source: [3] [4]

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Black Cap Mountain
Comment: Believe it or not, this is my first DYK in Canada... Victoria Day, perhaps? Thank you to the friend who took and uploaded this photo for me!

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 04:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

Adequate sourcing:
Neutral:
Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
Other problems:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Since the article is entitled CBUVT and that is presumably an acronym it would be good to have it explained in the lead.Also the relevant section for DYK is CBUVT#The_Kings_Road_studio where (UVic) could follow "University of Victoria" so that's it's clear what "UVic" is when used in next sentence Quite a weird way to move into a building! And therefore a good hook. The 35 year year claim needs clarifying, is it 1977-2012? I'm asking since the cite for the 2012 moving back in is clear in 'CBC Radio operations moving to CHEK station', but the land was bought 1976 and planning granted 1977 according to https://www.newspapers.com/clip/49968455/city-group-to-design-cbc-studio/ and 'White elephant sale for CBC studio here' says it was bought 1975 and sold 1980 by CBC. Also the link in hook is maybe better to pipe to CBUVT#The_Kings_Road_studio since the overall article is quite large. Mujinga (talk) 20:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: I've edited the main hook because I looked back at the article and it is indeed 34 years. It is 1978 to 2012 (I thought the article said they'd move in in 2013). The 1978 date is when the federal budget cuts put all work on hold. I don't like the idea of piping the hook link, personally.

As to the CBUVT question... Typically, {{Infobox broadcast}} is present in a TV station article and it has a spot for "call letters meaning". However, I had thought it not the most relevant for a television station that never signed on the air (though I've added it). The CBUVT call letters are definitely a derivation of CBUT (the "parent" CBC station in Vancouver) with an inserted V for Victoria; this letter insertion was sometimes used by other CBC repeaters and by the CBC's French-language TV stations outside of Quebec (CBUFT, for instance, with F for French). I've decided to add something on that into the infobox. Raymie (t • c) 21:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Raymie thanks for the answer. The infobox is helpful for people like me who have no idea about Canadian TV acronyms. On the piping, sure it was just a suggestion. I didn't strike out the UVic comment yet but if you prefer it how it is, also not a problem.

On the number of years, if we take 1978 as the start per this link then that can be added as a source, instead of 'White elephant sale for CBC studio here'. For the end date, 'CBC Radio operations moving to CHEK station' does cover this and it says moving back was planned for fall 2012, so that's indeed 34 years. Mujinga (talk) 09:42, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: Ah, what you're looking for in the white elephant story is "empty for almost two years". That's the 1978 justification from that source. Also I fixed the UVic acronym issue. Raymie (t • c) 18:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

cool thanks for pointing that out, i missed it. i do think the other link is clearer on the 1978 date but i agree that white elephant does cover it so that removes my concerns and the co-ordinators have the other link if they need it, this then is good to go, cheers Mujinga (talk) 18:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:CBUVT/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 02:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria[edit]

1. Prose On hold

2. Verifiability On hold

3. Depth of Coverage ✓ Pass

4. Neutral ✓ Pass

5. Stable ✓ Pass

6. Illustrations ✓ Pass

7. Miscellaneous ✓ Pass

Comments[edit]

1.

" 1974 provincial government report written by former Liberal MLA Barrie Clark" - This one's going to take some creativity to avoid MOS:SEAOFBLUE. Liberal should be linked to the relevant party, and the acronym MLA should be linked, too.
"In March, transport minister Bob Strachan" - Should transport minister be capitalized? Communications Minister is capitalized above
" It did not end up applying itself, though it expressed disappointment at the failure of the federal government to reserve the channel for a noncommercial use" - This is referring to the province, right?
"while it suggested developing educational television on the UHF band," - Link UHF to the relevant article
"Liberal MP Simma Holt of Vancouver Kingsway" - Link MP. In the US, it isn't obvious this is Member of Parliament

2.

Spot check of refs comes up clean.
Call sign meaning isn't cited anywhere

3.

4.

5.

6.

Image licensing looks good.

7.

Good work, placing on hold. Hog Farm (talk) 16:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hog Farm, I've just made the suggested additional links and changes. As to the call sign meaning, there's no citable source, but that's most certainly what it is given the call sign scheme used by some other CBC repeaters. It had come up in my DYK nomination for this article that there was no explanation, which is fair, but it's also true that there's no way to find a citable source. Raymie (t • c) 18:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]