Talk:TV and FM DX/Archive 1

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1

Bivariate-correlator

Why do you keep unwikifying, deleting blocks of text, and similar behavior? I have asked you on your talk page and you don't respond! Andre (talk) 04:10, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

If I deleted any blocks of text, it was because the information was either out of context or needed to be included in a separate paragraph.
Andrevan, just out of curiosity, what experience do you have regarding TV or FM DX? If you are recognised in the TV FM DX community, I would likely be familiar with your real name. Are you really qualified to edit this article? Bivariate-correlator May 3, 2005
First of all, you don't need to be "qualified" to edit an article on Wikipedia. This is an egalitarian project where experts have no status over non-experts. To find the information I did to originate and contribute to this article, I consulted knowledgeable DXers whose names you may know but I will not list here in case they would like to remain anonymous. Any errors regarding DX are my own misinterpretations of information given me by these people. Every time I make an edit that isn't correct, an expert can fix it. However, you must explain why what you are saying is true, or cite sources for your point of view, which you haven't been doing. Your name itself isn't enough. For what it's worth, I'm going to ask one of my sources about the link betweeen DX and pirate radio, which I feel exists. I'm not going to give you a hard time about your earlier removals and unwikifications, but please use edit summaries from now on. Andre (talk) 20:50, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
If you are prepared to provide specific examples, I will explain my point of view. Everything in the article can be backed up by either online or publication reference sources. Bivariate-correlator May 4, 2005

Pirate Radio

  • Pirate radio has no connection with TV and FM DX. Any reference to pirate radio has no place in the article. As a DXer with some 30 years experience, I have never heard a pirate transmitter via long-range signal propagation. Moreover, pirate radio or television transmissions are illegal, hence TV and FM DX clubs do not encourage any association with this type of broadcasting. If anything, TV FM DX and shortwave radio DX have a lot more in common.
First off, this is already an excellent article. A comment: It may be that you have never heard a pirate station in 30 years (I have ... licensed ham since 1961). But pirate DXing, illegal or not, may be of interest to readers of the article as well as other editors. Wikipedia is a community project, not a solitary one. Your claim below that low-power signals don't propagate over long distances is completely spurious; ever heard a watt (or less) beacon? To *discuss* pirate xmits is not to *condone* them. I'd encourage you to lighten up. Twang 19:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Pirate radio DX is mostly confined to the 3-30 MHz shortwave radio HF bands. Even with low transmitter power, HF pirate transmissions are well propagated. In contrast, although pirate FM stations also infrequently operate in the 88-108 MHz FM band, their low transmitter power (ERP) precludes signal propagation over long distances. Moreover, government regulatory bodies such as the FCC, ensure that most pirate transmissions are shut down. Bivariate-correlator 13:36, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

This article is obviously not yet ready for submission as a Wikipedia featured article candidate. I intend to contact other DXers regarding possible photos, i.e., off-screen TV pictures via tropospheric and F2 propagation, for inclusion in the article. Also, I intend to submit further technical information.

Bivariate-correlator

I have discovered that DXers such as M. Bugaj and E. Fader in the New York/New Jersey/Connecticut area have heard pirates from as far as Florida using FM DX. Despite the fact that pirate transmitters are illegal, I believe that the interest in setting up a pirate station is related to DXing. Andre (talk) 19:53, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

I agree that if a pirate FM station can somehow arrange to generate at least 50-500 watts transmitter power, there is a small chance they can be received via E-skip during the summer months. However, having said that, this type of Es reception is still rare compared to the normal legal commercial and non-commercial FM stations received. Moreover, pirate TV DX is extremely rare.

As a compromise, it may be possible briefly comment on the fact that 88-108 MHz pirate FM stations are very occasionally received via E-skip. However, I definitely would not approve any mention of pirate broadcasting in the introduction paragraphs. A separate paragraph could be created listing the types of FM stations (including pirates) that are received by DXers. Bivariate-correlator 08:11, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Alright, that's a reasonable compromise. Andre (talk) 17:33, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you very much for finally responding. Your contributions to this article are useful and helpful, but you seem to be missing some important parts of Wikipedia etiquette and procedure. It is customary to discuss edits and use edit summaries to explain why your edits are worthwhile. Also, I have a few questions. Firstly, why is the form "TV FM DX" better than "TV/FM DX" or "TV-FM DX", as changed in your latest edit? Secondly, what is the copyright information on the images you have uploaded to Wikipedia? If they are your own, do you release them under a free license? Andre (talk) 20:23, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • A Google search reveals that "TV-FM DX" and TV FM DX" are the most popular forms. Since "TV-FM DX" provided the most search results, I submit that the article should be re-named to "TV-FM DX". Another alternative is to have a separate article for both TV DX, and FM DX.
  • Alright, I've moved the article to TV-FM DX.
  • If that photo is one of your personal photos, please state this on the image information page and add a copyright tag as soon as possible.
  • From now on, please get permission/confirmation from copyright owners before uploading your photos. Andre (talk) 20:53, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

Planned to do list

  • The introduction section is quite good. Given the space restrictions of Wikipedia articles, additional information to the introduction section is likely not needed.
  • History section needs to supplemented by other DXer's information. I have already asked one well-known U.S. TV DXer for advice.
  • Various TV and FM DX distance records, as detailed in the history section, could be moved to a notable DX reception section.
  • The signal propagation sections are quite detailed. Apart from a small additional section covering aircraft scatter; most of the information is now adequate.
  • As a general rule, it seems that many featured Wikipedia articles include a maximum seven to ten photos. The Wikipedia Spring Heeled Jack article includes ten photos. The TV-FM DX article currently includes five photos. If possible, I would like to include three more photos:
Typical TV FM DX antenna installation.
High quality FM DX tuner.
Off-screen tropospheric TV DX photo.
  • Ensure that there are minimal (red) internal wikilinks.
  • Before the TV-FM DX article is again re-submitted as a featured article candidate, I submit that the following articles could be used as a benchmark: Spring Heeled Jack, Beatles.

Bivariate-correlator 06:30, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

It isn't important to not have red wikilinks. Red wikilinks are important, they are what create new articles. Otherwise, I agree with your ideas. Andre (talk) 18:08, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

Further Suggestions

  • Move Roger Bunney DX TV book details from the History section to the Reference section.
  • Create two separate reference sections: one for internet articles, and one for printed publications.
    • No - this would be non-standard for Wikipedia articles.
  • History section still needs further input from other contributers.
  • Add new section with brief summary of antenna and receiver requirements.
  • Add typical TV FM DX antenna and receiver installation photos.
  • Add high quality FM DX tuner photo.
  • Experienced Wikipedia contributer could examine article for any needed punctuation changes.
    • I'm an admin and an experienced contributor - why do we need another one?

Bivariate-correlator 09:57, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Andre (talk) 23:19, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Web References and Publication References in one Single Reference Section

  • The Carl Sagan (featured) Wikipedia article includes both internet and publication references in a single reference section.

Bivariate-correlator 11:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Er, yes. That's the standard style. Andre (talk) 15:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

DX cluster

The article DX cluster is currently up for deletion, mainly due to the poor quality of the writing but also because it does not provide any context. Perhaps somebody with some knowledge of the subject could have a look to see if anything can be salvaged. Cheers TigerShark 22:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Antenna array image

I've removed the antenna array image from this article. The image is listed as fair use, however, it does not appear the use of the antenna array image in this article meets the fair use criteria, since this article is not about antenna arrays. Sagsaw 18:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Splitting

I think it would be a good idea to split the general bits about the different radio wave propagation modes into their own articles. The TV-FM DX article can contain a summary and more information related directly to TM-FM DXing. I've added some suggestions (in the form of templates) in the article. KMS 21:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the split this section should be returned to its own article rather than a redirect. Ducting occurs to more then just TV-FM broadcast bands and is not limited to any particular method of modulation. Although TV-FM DXer's may use this phenomenon for entertainment does not change the fact that this occurs across the VHF/UHF spectrum and effects many other forms of radio communication and should not be generalized it into one group.
--DP67 (talk/contribs) 02:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Traduction

Hi, I'm italian, and FM dxer. I would like to translate this voice on Wiki-Italy Is possible to use your texts and the photograph? Fabrizio Carnevalini fmdxITALY www.fmdx.altervista.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.51.29.61 (talk) 00:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why not. I am not a pro on the 1 million and a half WP:RULES but as far as I know there are none that say you cannot translate an article into another language. In fact, I believe it is encouraged. --DP67 (talk/contribs) 01:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, Thanks, Fabrizio

it.wiki doesn't have the fair use, so the only pictures usable seem to be Arecibo Overview.jpg (from commons).--Yoggysot (talk) 19:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RTQ0DarlingDownsQldWINSlide.jpg

Image:RTQ0DarlingDownsQldWINSlide.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) 04:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I made a DX!!!

This is an incident last year i watch TV and i found chinese television in Thailand when i was tuned to Channel 1 of VHF! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tw3435 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Notable entries

I'm not sure what's notable about "On July 14, 2008, Justin Wolffing from Wyoming received multiple stations from the midwestern United States the farthest of which was WMMQ, 94.9 FM, East Lansing, Michigan at a distance of 1,324 miles (2,131 km).[25]" That distance is rather common, just by a quick glance of logs available online. Not every single DX reception deserves its own bullet. I'd be willing to bet the guy just added himself. 71.178.154.253 (talk) 14:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed three notable entries of questionable notability. Standard, analog single- and double-hop FM DX, while still rare, isn't notable enough to be listed next to transatlantic FM, firsts with new signal types, etc.71.178.154.253 (talk) 23:12, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

So why keep other references to distances much shorter than the ones you removed. Just because you think it is not notable, doesn't mean the rest of Wikipedia would. What makes them questionable? The one you mention above was 1324 miles. There were several dx distances referenced above that that were not as small. If anything is going to go, remove the lesser distances and keep the longer ones.

We need another opinion on this before we go and remove parts of the article that are clearly cited. --milonica (talk) 04:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I think a 1300 mile FM reception is pretty damn good. I can barely receive a station I like from inside my apartment thats only 50 miles away. TomCat4680 (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Distance isn't the sole criterion. FM DX < 1500mi is very common. The shorter entries are for band III DX, firsts in DTV via Es, firsts in HD Radio via Es, etc. Not bog-standard, analog FM DX over a single Es hop. If that's notable, lots and lots of DXers could put up their own logs up here. I'd like to see a good reason for keeping them, rather than "other things are shorter, so it stays up." 71.178.154.253 (talk) 15:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

If I might add, my first comment went unanswered for two months, so it seemed like a safe delete. 71.178.154.253 (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

E-skip merge

The E-skip section should be merged into Sporadic E propagation. I tried to follow the instructions on the official way to propose this but... they're stupidly complicated and I gave up. Perhaps someone could do it for me. --Mwongozi (talk) 13:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the project. Stupid and complicated is what Wikipedia does best. You might have added "arbitrary", too. And Jimbo help you if you get a template parameter wrong, or forget to type a colon at critical places, or don't wear the correct strings of bear teeth and palm fronds when making the sacred chants; you've got a good chance of getting swarmed by people who have no time to fix the mistake but endless time to bitch about those who make mistakes.
I belive I've buried some bones and made the proper mystic passes to promote the discussion of moving some details from this article to Sporadic E propagation; no doubt my fan club will soon arrive to pee all over the idea, but there's some chance a productive disucssion will happen as well. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
...and it's always a special boost to my self esteem when I welcome someone to the project who's been around longer than I have. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:28, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Add 47 year old television signals bouncing back to Earth?

Seems a relevant addition to the article - but my skillz don't extend so far as making WikiEdits.

Checkit - http://www.rimmell.com/bbc/news.htm and add if you think appropriate. I thought it was pretty cool. <ref><http://www.rimmell.com/bbc/news.htm> FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:21, 28 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.146.172.146 (talk) 13:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC) ... For an April Fool's joke ... --FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:21, 28 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.146.172.146 (talk) 20:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

BBC signals in 1938 not accidentally received

I'll come back to this later when I can dig out more, but the description of the signals being accidentally received might not be accurate. Engineers at the RCA lab in Long Island did accidentally pick up the BBC, but in January 1937, the year before; they received the audio carrier of the Alexandra Palace transmissions on numerous occasions that year but didn't have the equipment to try for the video signal, although they could hear it. There is an article in the September 1937 edition of Television and Short-Wave World describing their work; they also picked up the German and French television services and (possibly) the Italian service. The BBC audio might also have been received in Chicago as well. The article is on page 527 of the magazine here and credit where credit is due, I only found this (while looking for something else) in the archives of "405 Alive", the magazine of the 405 Line Group, which I ran across at the British Vintage Wireless Society website here.

There are hints in other places that the RCA guys actually brought in a receiver and were looking for the BBC signal in 1938, rather than accidentally running across it. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:21, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on TV and FM DX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:24, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:TV_and_FM_DX/Archive_1"