Talk:WWWQ-HD2

Personnel split

I see the comment in the text for why there's a split in the list of station staff. Is there a better way to indicate it with article headers (and keep the note in the comment)? I contemplated "Primary staff" and "Support staff", but that doesn't appear to be an accurate yet brief representation of what the comment says. RadioBoy2003 (talk) 03:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Missing the old

I miss 99X being on the normal radio. Its only available on HD now. --~~~~Marshall

But one day, the format might be back again on a different frequency. You never know until we reach they day it happens. Georgia guy (talk) 13:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess it's good to keep dreaming!  :) --Evil Eccentric (talk) 03:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Move and rewrite

This article needs a huge amount of editing. For instance, shouldn't the article title be changed to W250BC, which currently redirects to WNNX (Rock 100.5)? Also, WWWQ#99X needs to be completely rewritten. I think we should reformat this article so one section is like "As WNNX" and then another section could be called "As W250BC" with two infoboxes. The eras seem different enough to warrant separation (i.e. Dekker is relevant enough to mention, but he's not a current DJ). Also, is the station callsign W250BC or WWWQ-HD2? Or is it both? I'd do this all myself but I'm busy with finals coming up next week. Thanks in advance! --Evil Eccentric (talk) 01:47, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, maybe there should even be three sections, for when it was online only. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 01:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus. -- Aervanath (talk) 11:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

---

• Support. Radio station articles go at their callsigns, not their brand names. Georgia guy (talk) 16:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose until a final decision is reached. See above. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 19:22, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. Shouldn't this be moved to WWWQ-HD2? I don't really know that much about radio, so I could be wrong. However, based on what the Wikipedia currently says, it seems W250BC is just a translator callsign, i.e. it repeats what's heard from another band, in this case WWWQ-HD2. If you listen to 99X long enough, they say, "WWWQ-HD2, now 99X at 97.9 FM." W250BC just provides a way of repeating an HD signal in regular FM. This is what happens if you go to W237DE, a translator that transmits the HD signal for WNNK. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 03:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. After a little more digging, I found out that WNNK-HD2 has it's own article as WTCY, even though it's just an HD station. Then again, I don't think those letters are real, just being used for advertising reasons [1]. Since WNNX has been taken, shouldn't we call it WWWQ-HD2 for the same reasons? --Evil Eccentric (talk) 03:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. Actually, that WTCY article was not handled correctly. Like I mentioned below, what they're referring to as WTCY is actually a translator and should only be mentioned on the parent station's article. The actual WTCY article should have been moved to WHGB per WP:WPRS naming convention. Instead they made a brand new article, a move I plan to undo. RobDe68 (talk) 03:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Reject Move To W250BC. The "call name" in this case is nothing but a translator identifier and not the actual name of the radio station. 99x, as a brand name, is still viable and widely used. It is similar to a brand such as Mazda being purchased by Ford. You don't rename the car a Ford but instead it still retains its original identity. This article should either a)stay as 99x or b)have a new page created entitled WWWQ-HD2. My overall prefence being option a. -- Werecowmoo (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. WP:RM understands Support and Oppose, but not Reject. Georgia guy (talk) 23:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
    • Comment I am well aware of that. I chose to use the term "reject" to show how strongly I feel about it. I am sure a smart person would understand what is meant. Werecowmoo (talk) 00:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
      • Comment. The use of Reject on the proposal to move Heroin to some long name was a factor in it being speedily closed. Reject is clearly not normally expected. 199.125.109.124 (talk) 14:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. I opt for the second choice, since standard radio station protocol suggests using the call letters as the article's name (see WNNX and WKLS). However, WTCY is the same sort of deal as 99X; it used to be a radio station named WTCY. It has since been moved to WNNK-HD2, so WTCY are free call letters. Yet they still call it WTCY rather than W237DE, since that was its historical name. Thus the first choice would be more consistent with other articles. Still I support naming the article WWWQ-HD2 since those are the official call letters 99X identifies itself as. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 19:22, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. I moved WTCY to WHGB per WP:WPRS naming convention regarding stations that change their call signs (1400 AM WTCY changed call sign to WHGB). Don't get me wrong, I'm quite interested in the outcome of this discussion because I think this translator/HD2 issue may start becoming a trend so if the guidelines regarding translators need to be modified so be it and if that comes to be I will personally recreate the WTCY page (only with the translator name and a new page).RobDe68 (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. I apologize to those participating in this discussion for moving the page prematurely; I have now reverted the move. Another user placed a {{db-move}} request on the redirect page W250BC, and I performed the move based on that without checking this talk page first. Obviously, this was a mistake, and I will be more careful in future. My reverting the move is not based on any opinion about the appropriate outcome of this discussion; rather, I simply should not have done anything until the discussion is concluded. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 23:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
• Comment. I checked with WikiProject Radio Stations. They said "WWWQ-HD2" is the correct title. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 17:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
• CommentOppose. I first read about this station launching a few days ago and was going to move the 99X article but thought I should look into the matter a little closer instead of performing a hasty move. It turns out that technically W250BC is still considered a translator for WNNX broadcasting the HD2 channel from sister station WWWQ (still within the FCC definition of a translator). And since the WP:WPRS guidelines for translators states "... Translators should be included in the parent station's article and should not have their own page.", I would say that there should be a mention of 99X on the WNNX article regarding its translator signal with a link to the main, mostly historic, 99X article (perhaps with a better name). That's my 2 cents. RobDe68 (talk) 03:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
• Well the consensus seems to be "Comment", but I Support. The fact that W250BC is "retransmitting" another station is entirely a technicality and a loophole that gets them around normal rules. It is clear that W250BC is considered and is used, both by the licensee/owner and listeners, as the primary station. Consider the fact that almost nobody has even one HD Radio receiver (and many have no idea what it even is), while almost everyone has multiple FM receivers. Millions of people can hear the FM, while maybe thousands can hear the "HD", which was the whole point of putting it on a "translator" in the first place. The callsign may be unusual for FM, but it is common on LPTV stations (which do not have a differentiation based on translating or originating programming), so it would by no means be outside of the standards. Also, WP:WPRS was written well before the HD-to-FM translators issue came about. Lastly, "HD" channels do not deserve their own articles — 99X only kept its article separately because it is one of those rare legendary stations that had a huge influence and a long history. I should also note that the commenter above is correct, its primary station is legally WNNX FM 100.5, not WWWQ FM 99.7.  –radiojon (talk) 10:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  One other thing I forgot: note that, except for the extremely well-established brand name of 99X, these HD-to-FM stations use the FM "translator" frequency, such as "The Touch 95.3" (WTCY), and briefly earlier this month in Atlanta, "Streetz 102.9" on W275BK (simulcast on WWVA-FM 105.7-HD2). Even 99X uses "99X on 97.9". This is a very strong reason to put such stations at their FM "translator" calls, in addition to the fact that "HD2" is not part of the legal callsi gn for any station (even if it, like the city of license, must be used in the legal station ID).  –radiojon (talk) 03:44 (addendum at 5:19), 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I moved the WTCY page mentioned above as an example to WHGB because that's what should have happened when the station changed call sign/format. The new page created for WHGB was turned into a redirect to the WHGB page as WHGB (AM) to preserve its edit history. If consensus is reached to move 99X (Atlanta) to the translator call sign W250BC then I will take that WHGB (AM) redirect page and recreate the WTCY page for the 95.3 FM frequency only using the translator call sign. I still say, unless the WP:WPRS guidelines are changed, that the translator should not have a stand alone article. RobDe68 (talk) 19:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Radiojon makes good points. I listen to it on 97.9 too. However, WP:WPRS still stands, in my opinion. It says that translators shouldn't have a separate article, but it condones article names having odd endings if it's notable and an article already exists at WWWQ. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 19:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Support. Contrary to what the article states, 99X is not a radio station. If it was, then it would be listed in the FCC database of radio stations. In sorting this out, and if I have this correct, this is simply an HD channel from one radio station that is being rebroadcast on an FCC designated FM translator station. While a bit odd, the existing WP:WPRS naming conventions still seem to apply. Since W250BC is not originating anything it should not have an article at all. By renaming it will allow time to merge the material into the main article and then the translator article can be returned to it's correct position as an article redirect. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

By "main article" do you mean WWWQ/WNNX? It would be difficult to merge this article into either one of those; it has been around for 15 years, haha. This article definitely meets notability requirements; the only question seems to be where to put it. BTW, I was listening to it today and it said, "This is W250BC and WWWQ-HD2, 99X at 97.9 FM." So it looks like we're all right. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 02:03, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Based on your report and WP:WPRS, the merge should be into WWWQ since it is the radio station broadcasting that HD channel. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move further discussion

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was moved to WWWQ-HD2, at least for now. Once a broader consensus is reached on a general naming convention for these articles, the article can be moved or merged to the appropriate location. -- Aervanath (talk) 19:53, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

---

I would like to reopen this discussion. The result was no consensus but I believe it should be moved merged to WNNX WWWQ-HD2 with 99X (Atlanta) and W250BC and WWWQ-HD2 as redirects. This is inline with the conventions used by WP:WPRS. One major purpose of organizing articles by station (and naming them by callsign as a result) is that formats and brandings change very often, callsigns change much less often and the stations themselves rarely come and go. As time moves on, the articles get updated with information about ownership, format and sometimes callsign changes. Naming an article according to the station's branding is backwards from the convention that has worked well for years. Any objections to moving this article to WWWQ-HD2? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RadioFan (talk • contribs)

• Support rename to WWWQ-HD2. WP:WPRS doesn't warrant articles about translators, but does allow articles to have -HD2 at the end, so long as notability is met (which it definitely does). This is also the originating signal, so it would make sense. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
• Absolutely Oppose. WP:WPRS ignores the issue of FM "translators" being used as main stations because the issue didn't exist when it was written, and a proposal to correct this omission is pending there (where there is a list of a dozen very good reasons for not moving this and similar articles to anything "HD", but rather to their main FM, the supposed "translator" that everyone actually listens to, and whose freqeuncy is the only one used in the station's branding many times each hour and in advertising). Also, legally W250BC is connected to WNNX on 100.5, not WWWQ on 99.7.  –radiojon (talk) 17:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose (with comment). I don't think we're coming to any consensus on this article talk page. The truth is, if WP:WPRS is wrong and ignoring the unique situation with this station, then consensus needs to be reached on the project talk page to change the guidelines regarding translators with different programming than the parent station. I've really been saying that all along. RobDe68 (talk) 01:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I agree. However, we need to put it somewhere, and 99X (Atlanta) isn't it. We need to team up and make WP:WPRS change their guidelines, haha. Right now, they're just sitting there avoiding it. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 02:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment This is something that WP:WPRS may need to consider in the future but I dont think that project is jumping on this because there is no indication that the issue extends beyond this one article so the discussion should occur on that article's talk page. Are there other instances where translators are being used to broadcast unique signals? WWWQ-HD2 might not be the right place. 99X (Atlanta) definitely isn't the right place. Seperate HD programing has traditionally been a section in the parent station's page so I'm adjusting my suggested solution to merging this article into WNNX based on the license connection as mentioned by radiojon above. This actually means that no adjustment to WP:WPRS guidelines is necessary which is also why there likely hasn't been a rush to discuss this there.--RadioFan (talk) 12:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment. Merging will result in an article that is 45317 bytes. This means that WNNX will very likely be over 50KB one day within the next 12 months, and in turn that someone will request an appropriate split. Georgia guy (talk) 15:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose per Georgia guy's point. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 16:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment. This is ridiculous! Evil Eccentric first voted to support, and then to oppose, without striking out his original vote. Georgia guy (talk) 16:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't clear. I meant that I oppose merging with WNNX. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment Can we first come to a consensus that 99X (Atlanta) is not an appropriate title? Once we are past that, we can decide on merge or create a new article.--RadioFan (talk) 16:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Response. It is inconsistent with the rule that American radio station articles go at their callsigns, not their brand names. When is there a special case where they go at their brand names instead?? Georgia guy (talk) 16:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I think he's agreeing with you. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

First, the article size is definitely something I've thought about, and Georgia guy made my point on that. Yet another reason not to merge. Second, this is already an issue at several stations, and I know of at least three: W237DE, W250BC (99X), and W275BK, the last of which is also in Atlanta and briefly aired its own "Streetz 102.9" for a few days earlier this month. The only reason I put it at WWVA-FM (its HD station) is because it was a "flash in the pan" and is not on-air, and may never be. All of these use[d] their FM freq, not their HD, as their branding/moniker. The issue needs to be addressed, and with an open and neutral mind, considering all the facts. Otherwise we're arguing about whether to cram the new triangular peg ito the old round hole or the square one.  –radiojon (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree. We need to get real input from WP:WPRS on this. --Evil Eccentric (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The focus of opposition here seems to be around forcing changes to WP:WPRS guidelines rather than the naming of this article. If you've got suggestions on rewording those guidelines, why not propose it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Radio Stations? We'll be much more likely to gain consensus here after some more concrete discussion about treatment of translators.--RadioFan (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

There are already several other radio stations, mostly AM stations like WSYA, who use their translator frequency as part of their branding. All of these articles are named for the originating AM station call signs, not the FM translator used in the branding. There is no doubt in my mind that this station's article should be at WWWQ-HD2 with 99X (Atlanta) and other names as redirects. - Dravecky (talk) 18:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

• Support rename to WWWQ-HD2. Since this is a more correct name for the article based on existing guidelines. I think this move should be made while WP:WPRS discusses the broader issues. If as a result of those discussions, this article needs to be merged we can do it then, the merge question should not affect the rename. No reason to leave this article at what most editors probably agree is an inappropriate name. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

What to do

If a new station comes on at 97.9, what should we do to this article?? Radio station articles are normally supposed to follow station history, not callsign history. Look at WWWQ and WNNX as examples. Georgia guy (talk) 13:41, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 2012

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 09:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

---

WWWQ-HD2 → 99X (Atlanta) – 99X is no longer on either W255CJ FM nor on WWWQ HD-2.  —radiojon (talk) 04:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Oppose. Articles for radio stations in the United States go at their callsigns, never at brand names like 99X. Georgia guy (talk) 12:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Oppose: Per GeorgiaGuy above. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:21, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Oppose. Wikipedia uses call signs for American broadcasters, not the ever-shifting hard-to-source branding to name articles. Yes, call signs shift too but when they do the FCC publishes the change. - Dravecky (talk) 13:23, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Seriously? The whole point is that 99X no longer has any callsign whatsoever. It was taken off the air on August 31st, but is still active at 99X.com only, there is no station transmitting it at this time.  —radiojon (talk) 18:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

You mean this should be an article about the 99X brand name itself (as opposed to an article about a station with it)?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Weird heading

I think that:

The correct title of this article is 99X (Atlanta). It appears incorrectly here because of technical restrictions.

is a weird header for this article. Any thoughts?? Georgia guy (talk) 20:57, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Merger discussion

It would make sense to merge the contents from W255CJ into this article. WWWQ-HD2 can retain the history of the original 99X (99.7 WNNX) up to the present day, and incorporate the history of its translator, W255CJ. Not sure if all this information needs to be spread over two articles. --DrChuck68 (talk) 02:26, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Disagree: There is far too much history that is solely W255CJ and solely WWWQ-HD2. Plus, both articles are fairly long as they are. Unless Sammi Brie can work some of her magic, I don't see this merge happening. Just like the other merges and moves, this page keeps coming back like a bad fungus. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:02 on April 30, 2021 (UTC)

Closing, given the uncontested objection and no support. Klbrain (talk) 19:31, 16 May 2021 (UTC)