Talk:Live Wire Radio

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because it is modeled after an article that has been accepted, specifically the Prairie Home Companion Wikipedia page. You will see that the sections in the Live Wire page are of the same style and format as the Prairie Home page, which has been widely accepted. Granted, there is more information on the Prairie page, but the show has been around longer and I still have a lot to put into the Live Wire page. This is my first Wikipedia article and it took a lot longer to write and format than I had expected. I plan on flushing it out more using the sources listed in the references section.

I would appreciate feedback on what items should be modified to make this page acceptable, as I'm not sure how this page is seen as promotional compared to the Prairie Home Companion page it is modeled after, and am happy to make any necessary changes.

Thank you!

Trentfinlay (talk) 04:53, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Per NPOV you should not be writing, editing, or contributing to, this entry. It appears you are a publicist, producer, or employed in some other capacity by the topic of this article (http://www.livewireradio.org/blogs/trent-finlay). BlueSalix (talk) 23:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Trentfinlay clearly appears to have some sort of professional connection to the subject of this article, and so I will be adding the {{Connected contributor}} template to this page shortly. That said, edits made by a user w/ a conflict of interest are not necessarily non-NPOV. I see no obvious evidence of spam or promotion, at least in the article's current form. Levdr1lp / talk 05:47, 28 December 2013 (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. 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: not moved. There is a clear consensus to retain the current title. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:56, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

---

Live Wire Radio → Live Wire! Radio – The branding of the show includes an exclamation point.[1] Also, most sources discussing the show omit the third word "Radio", so the exclamation point allows a two-word short version of the name—Live Wire!—which retains its branding. Binksternet (talk) 01:40, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• Support Strong Support as per Binksternet (edit: assuming it's not deleted, which seems like a big "IF" at this point) BlueSalix (talk) 01:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: "edit". Hardly. The views are fairly divided. There are detailed, policy-based arguments for and against keeping this article, and I don't yet see a clear consensus emerging (though that could change). Levdr1lp / talk 19:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

This is not really a relevant comment to this move discussion. Thanks, BlueSalix (talk) 05:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

It was no more or less relevant than your "edit" comment. Levdr1lp / talk 05:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

My edit comment was to note that my "Support" vote was conditional; it was relevant and necessary. Recreating an active AfD debate here is not. We should work collaboratively to ensure discussions remain topical. Thank you. BlueSalix (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, your "edit" comment was mostly unnecessary; you could've just as easily said, as I did, that we should wait until the AFD discussion concludes. Instead, you opted to predict an ongoing discussion's outcome for no good reason. So if anyone has allowed the AFD discussion to spill over onto this article's talk page, it's you. Levdr1lp / talk 06:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

oh, lord BlueSalix (talk) 06:53, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Exactly. Levdr1lp / talk 06:56, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

• Support Oppose (per concerns raised by Rushton, Dicklyon) but wait until ongoing discussion at AFD plays out. Levdr1lp / talk 21:40, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - as per Wikipedia:Article titles article titles appear in standard English, and such formatting marks, regardless of being part of trademarks, are usually ignored in the article title. For example Ke$ha, who's article is Kesha, and ignores the $ sign.

If we think of practicality, when someone is writing a link to the article, or searching for it, are they going to use an exclamation mark? No. Not even their official website (mentioned above) uses it. --Rushton2010 (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I take your point, Rushton. However, while the exclamation mark is not in the site url (is that even possible?), it is on the main page logo and the page title above one's browser's address bar. That said, if a punctuation-free title better conforms to WP:AT, then let's lose the mark. Levdr1lp / talk 23:39, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose – their blog on their official website includes things like "We're also thanking three lucky Live Wire donors ...". They clearly don't need the ! to refer to themselves in an English sentence, and neither should we, per MOS:TM. Dicklyon (talk) 02:44, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

• You'll notice that Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! has the exclamation point in its Wikipedia title. I admit, however, that the branding of Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! is more consistent within NPR's website. I would not hold that against Live Wire!, since NPR has a lot more depth of resource—more double-checking by interns. Binksternet (talk) 04:28, 28 January 2014 (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.