Talk:KTTV

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Television: Stations Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Television stations task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Baseball Low‑importance

	Baseball portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball 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.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

If the station is known as Fox 11, then why is this article at KTTV?? 66.32.252.70 01:28, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

People ask pointless questions.

Not a pointless question, but it is most definitely one that can be answered with a heaping spoonful of common sense. Mike H 15:51, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)

It is somewhat of a pointless question, because many stations across have branded themselves by their network + over-the-air and/or local cable channel number (or even network/city or region, i.e. Fox Charlotte, CBS Detroit, Wisconsin's WB), and it's more commonplace in today's 500-channel universe. In fact, the Fox stations were the first to brand themselves by the network/channel number format, and it wasn't until UPN and The WB coming along in 1995 that we saw the Big Three networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC using the network/channel number format. Each television station has a certain identity they follow, and KTTV, like many others are simply letting viewers that Fox is on Channel 11, and Channel 11 is Fox. It's simple enough.

On another note, to the person(s) who are currently adding information to this entry, please use better grammar and spelling and have your facts straight when adding information. As someone who spent a lot of time researching information on KTTV, as well as a few other stations on the Los Angeles TV section, I really don't appreicate someone coming in and basically messing up what me and other people who actually care about these subjects actually took time and researched and add quality to these entries.

"Founded 1948" is after first broadcast date of 1949.

Bad Link

The link for Steve Edwards goes to a football player not the television personality.

New logo

Although KTTV's web site does not use the new logo, News Corporation's web site does: [1]. It is used on [2], which shows the logo for each station whenever you hover over the station's name. Obviously not ideal, due to the small size and white space, but it could be usable until KTTV's web site is fixed. I tried to upload it myself, but I got confused over the fairuse rationale, and then the uploader didn't seem to work. Someone with more experience with uploading could do the deed. Morgan Wick 08:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I removed the whitespace and uploaded it. If anybody wants to upload the logo from the KTTV website when its up, they can, but I don't see why it would be necessary unless it's considerably bigger and/or more detailed. Monty Barker 04:38, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:LOGO, "Common sense says that a logo displayed prominently on the corporation's own website should be OK to use, because it represents that company's wishes about how the logo is presented on computer screens at typical screen resolutions." (Emphasis added.) Then again, News Corp's website may count! Morgan Wick 04:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's happening so fast that any day now I expect to hear other Fox O&O's such as Houston's KRIV and Detroit's WJBK to follow along with the same approach -- Don't you agree??? --WIKISCRIPPS2K6 THU MAY 4 2006 8:28 PM EDT

"Fox" or "FOX"?

I noticed some revert wars regarding the Fox branding on several articles on Fox-owned stations. The official name of the network is not all uppercase, but that is how the company prefers it.

So, do we call it "Fox" or "FOX"? You decide. CoolKatt number 99999 02:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my response at Talk:WNYW. Rollosmokes 07:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fox Kids

When Did KTTV Bring Fox Kids Back?

It hasn't...as far as I know, the agreement between Fox and 4KIds TV was for only five years, ending this past TV season('06-'07), but apparently, that has changed, and now Fox Kids! is gone for good...I think...Baldwin91006 02:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of newscast schedules?

To all editors, please see the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Newscast_schedules.2C_redux, where the issue of removing locally originated programming schedules is discussed. Calwatch 05:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

eBaum users raiding MyFoxLA?

They are doing it in response to a news story they did last night, and they're reading the forums! Would this be notable enough for Wikipedia? No need for "primary sources", because the primary source is the raided message board! ViperSnake151 13:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

silly faggot, its eBaumsworld —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.196.179.225 (talk • contribs) 13:07, 27 July 2007.

it's eBaumsworld, idiot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.28.6.60 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 27 July 2007.

shawklet train Faulty 18:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

eBaumsworld. Not shut the hell up and go do something productive. tldr; gtfo nao.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.109.145.161 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 27 July 2007.

7chan and 420chan were not involved. It was entirely the work of eBaums. Get these facts corrected. The chans do not want to deal with this bullshit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.150.251.226 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 27 July 2007.

It's ebaums man, trust me.68.220.170.130 00:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Defraggler 01:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To add a serious contribution regarding this subject, 4chan was never mentioned in the article which this entry relates to. In fact, after watching the footage the page actually looks like that of 7chan (7chan.org). The references to others, but not Anonymous, should be removed. Anonymous is legion.Clontarf x 08:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it was more like 420chan, since although 7chan could be considered one of their "secret websites", they don't have an /i/ board anymore, but 420chan does. ViperSnake151 00:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I kinda expected this level of reporting from this station. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{talk • contribs}} 17:38, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Hacker Gangs" Controversy

FOX News Cast in Question. I think this event has some encyclopedic value, in a similar fashion as Dewey Defeats Truman, Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt#Contemporary_examples, Red Scare, Witch-hunt, etc. Its an example of poor journalism and demonization of technology. If there is reactionary occurrences or further development, I think it should get its own article. I assume I am probably in the minority here, though. Does any one have any suggestions as to where mention of this incident may be better served? ._-zro ^t_c 08:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:FOX11- 1991.jpg

Image:FOX11- 1991.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 07:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTTV/KTWV_Tower this link redirects to List of tallest structures in the world http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_structures_in_the_world this page does not list this tower, either the / in the link screws it up, or it goes to the right page, but the page has had the KTTV/KTWV tower info removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.148.199.66 (talk) 05:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Kttv70s.jpg

The image Image:Kttv70s.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding unreferenced entries of former employees to lists containing BLP material

Hello, Please do not add unreferenced names as entries to a 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:NLIST 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) 19:50, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on KTTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111115041821/http://www.myfoxla.com:80/subindex/studio_11_la to http://www.myfoxla.com/subindex/studio_11_la

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on KTTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090614204506/http://issuu.com:80/boxoffice/docs/boxoffice_111056-1 to http://issuu.com/boxoffice/docs/boxoffice_111056-1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:54, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on KTTV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080522123812/http://www.myfoxla.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=3894628&version=7&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1&sflg=1 to http://www.myfoxla.com/myfox/pages/ContentDetail?contentId=3894628

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:18, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Correct subchannel lineup

Here is the correct subchannel lineup for KTTV: [3]

And here's KCOP: [4]

Two separate stations. KCOP is carrying 11.2 and 11.3 on its own transmitter. KTTV just has 11.1 and 11.4. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 22:28, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]