Jump to content

Talk:Fresh 92.7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, Fresh FM is now officially called Fresh 92.7 can the article title be changed? --Mcardlej (talk) 02:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly Ongoing Revert War[edit]

NPOV notice put up. Please see History for detailed information. - Mailer diablo 11:40, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Definitely not neutral, in particular the final two paragraphs. NPOV notice added again. Goog 12:26, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Have you listened to the station? Very possibly not. I have and it is a true statement.

It is clear from the history that this page doesn't really have a legitimate dispute going on. Rather, it is being repeatedly targeted by, a precocious troll. Also, NPOV doesn't mean we have to tolerate clearly inflammatory rubbish; I'm removing the last two paragraphs. -- FirstPrinciples 12:30, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

I am not a troll. I am providing Wikipedia with a truthful and neutral posint-of-view. I guess socially elitists band together, everywhere around the world. Well, I'm not tolerating *that*.

Describing someone as an "elitist" is prima facie non-NPOV. -- FirstPrinciples 12:34, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

It can, and it is, NPOV. I am merely stating the facts.

From NPOV: "The neutral point of view attempts to present ideas and facts in such a fashion that both supporters and opponents can agree... we can only seek a type of writing that is agreeable to essentially rational people who may differ on particular points." Your repeated and uncompromising edits prima facie breach this guideline. -- FirstPrinciples 12:42, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

I have encounted the people behind this station. They would not disagree with my entry. They are social elitists and they wear that badge with honour.

Do we have any actual evidence that anyone other than our now-blocked friend has criticised the station for being elitist? If not, the last paragraph of the compromise version should probably come out. -- 12:59, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'm looking into it. It does seem a pretty unreasonable statement, but our friend was being rather tenacious, so I'm seeing if I can find criticism with Google. -- FirstPrinciples 13:11, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
Nope, I can't find any criticism of the station along the lines of "elitism" or related words. The claim that "elitism" would be a "badge of honour" to them also seems unrealistic. Perhaps a 24-hour break will help the guy cool down, and then he can engage in some constructive, evidence-based edits. -- FirstPrinciples 13:25, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
I would support a removal of the elitism text -- Chris 73 Talk 13:28, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

I'm just logging off so don't have time now to do anything about it, but I should point out that the whole page is a copyvio from http://www.freshfm.com.au/page.php?pid=about, which might make the whole discussion moot! -- 13:38, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Damn, you're right. In response, I have slightly revised and re-written some of the page content but it probably could do with a more thorough going-over. -- FirstPrinciples 14:26, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:New Fresh FM LogoSM.jpg[edit]

Image:New Fresh FM LogoSM.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]