Talk:Whole Wheat Radio

Untitled

I'm not really sure why the original "Wheathead" entry was changed and turned into an entry for "Whole Wheat Radio." The original intent was more "encyclopedic" (What is a Wheathead), and less promotional. The original intent was more for interest's sake rather than a plug for WWR. It sure would be nice for someone to change it back or add an entry for "Wheathead" again.

Massive image

May I suggest that the image is shrunken down a little bit? On my monitor (1024 x 768) it took up the entire horizontal length of the screen and was overwriting some of the Wikipedia information on the left of the form. Folkor 17:57, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

The image, Image:cabin.jpg, is the NOT WWR. I'll find another. -->>sparkit|TALK<< 18:33, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Much better (although really I know almost nothing about the WWR). Folkor 06:33, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Request for editor / expert input from WWR author

Please excuse any novice moves I make in this entry and my lack of editing skills. It's basically my first Wikipedia entry. I'm not sure this is the appropriate place to discuss this but here goes. I spent several hours reading about Wikipedia protocol and am sensitive to not wanting this entry to be promotional. Also, as one of the focal points behind Whole Wheat Radio (WWR), I realize there is danger in my contributing at all. On the other hand, having written the software engine behind the site, I am uniquely familiar with the inner-technical-workings of WWR.

I would like to contribute to this entry but would like someone with more Wiki experience (i.e. an editor) to concur. The area I would most like to see addressed is 'unique features'. These would include:

1) the ability for listeners / musicians to call a standard telephone number, record their message in their own voice on an unattended answering machine, and have it aired moments later.

2) the ability for listeners to type a message in the chat screen and have it read on-the-air as part of the normal programming by simulated 'robotic' voices

3) the ability for listeners to request music and entire hour long shows interactively without needing any human 'approval' at the station

4) the way the electronic DJs (EJs) gather information from the internet realtime (i.e. weather conditions specifically where listeners are located, concert ticket information, horoscopes, news, artist popularity via Last-FM, etc.) and integrate that both in written chat form and in synthesized voices into the webcast

5) some of the historical timeline of when WWR started, when the new "Wheat Hole" performance space was built, when we first started airing live house concerts, etc.

The reason I feel it's important to record this information in an encyclopedic form is largely for historic reasons. As the developer behind the Nochange BBS system in the 1980's, we instituted many unique features ... which were later integrated into other BBS's. Although there is some historical record of these innovations, much has been lost. At the time, documenting unique features didn't seem important. When I was contacted by an individual who was producing a documentary about the history of BBS's, he was curious about several of the unique Nochange features because they were so unusual. Unfortunately, I was only able to provide general recollections (http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/NOCHANGE/) and a small, but fascinating, piece of home-grown technological history has been lost.

What I would like to see in this entry is a section devoted to some of the history of technological innovations found (I believe) only on WWR. I suspect this information may one day be important for anyone studying the early evolution of webcasting and what helped differentiate it from standard broadcasting.

But I only want to attempt writing this section (as factually and non-egotistically and non-promotionally as possible) if the Wiki community / editors feel it is appropriate. Sorry if I should have just gone ahead and "been bold" but I'd rather err on the side of caution and tread lightly on this page. Jimkloss 11:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Go for it, Jim. Maybe a draft as a WWR.org page? Or is there already a history page there? I believe you can write this without a promotional or egotistical slant, and rest assured that any questionable slant will be edited out of the wikipedia article. >>sparkit|TALK<< 16:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC) (a.k.a. Annette Sparky Makinitupasigo)

Thanks for the feedback Sparkit. I may have found a compromise. I started a Whole Wheat Radio wiki today where historical information can be collected. I don't think my contributing to this Wikipedia entry, particularly after reading the vanity page, is appropriate. I'll feel more comfortable documenting various features on the WWR wiki and then if an independent contributor wants to use that as source material here, they can. Thanks for your comments though. And since you appear to be a real wikipedian expert, maybe you'll be able to contribute to our new wiki. Jimkloss 14:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I believe this will work out well. Contributing info about one's own stuff on wikipedia is dicey even if one is objective, lots of antennas are tuned into this sort of thing. So, rather than an assumption of NPOV in such cases, the assumption is that the writer's stance is POV, and they must "prove" their NPOV. Waste of time and emotional energy, IMO. See ya at the WWR wiki. >>sparkit|TALK<< 17:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Potential items for 'unclear importance' designation

Being one of the principals that helps keep WWR on-air, I don't think it's appropriate for me to write why WWR may or may not be of importance in a Wikipedia sense. But I thought I'd write some quick ideas as potential areas that others may want to cover:

1. WWR website is an interactive wiki using the same technology as Wikipedia - the first and perhaps only use of wiki technology I'm aware of for interactive music requesting / realtime chat / custom WWR system variables users can include on any page (i.e. what song is currently playing etc.)
2. live house concerts of nationally touring performers broadcast over the internet for 3 years - not entirely unique, but potentially of importance
3. WWR was the first live webcast to start podcasting (as well as including other people's podcasts in the webcast stream) ... and then purposely stop podcasting (in the traditional sense) due in part to technical disappointment with mainstream podcasting's direction
4. Wheatstalk 2005 gathering of listeners in Talkeetna, Alaska
5. use of text-to-voice synthesis software (EJs) allowing anyone to enter text and have it read on-air in near realtime
6. use of standard telephone technology (Phonegrams) to allow anyone to call and transmit voice messages on-air in near realtime

Note: If you are a listener who is not familiar with Wikipedia, please keep in mind that a neutral fact-oriented point-of-view is critical when editing articles such as this. Wikipedia is not an appropriate place to 'hype' or otherwise give personal opinions about WWR. It's best to just present facts (as you know them). If the Wikipedia community at large determines that WWR is not appropriate for a Wikipedia page (Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia) then please don't try to resurrect the page. Not being cluttered with pages that are of questionable importance is one of the main reasons Wikipedia works so well. (This article has some guidelines concerning website notability.) Thanks. Jimkloss 02:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Update forthcoming

Updates for this article are being prepared off-wikipedia site, at http://www.wholewheatradio.org/wiki/index.php/Wikipedia_article_draft_working>>sparkit|TALK<< 16:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC))

The article is now updated. Needs some wikification for style and so forth. >>sparkit|TALK<< 04:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Sticker moved from main page

Added by Kloss to the main article... Generally wikipedia editors delete these sorts of self-reference to users sorts of things from article main pages. --sparkit^TALK 18:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I had no idea but can sorta see why. Jimkloss (talk) 05:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

A Wikipedia category now exists for those who are interested in Whole Wheat Radio. Just add {{User:UBX/WWR}} to your user page.

This user listens to
Whole Wheat Radio

Reducing spam content

I intend to delete some of the WP:PROMO issues in this article. It'll all still be there in the history, but not all readers know about that. Therefore, I think it could be beneficial to retain unreferenced claims of genuine encyclopedic value, rather than immediately reducing content to the bare minimum. --Trevj (talk) 12:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Remove unsourced trash

You tell me this article is sourced. Please find a WP:RS to document the claim "Purchase and renovation of the Wheat Palace". If this is not documented by the end of this week, I will remove it. Shii (tock) 00:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Removed. Please find a RS to document the claim "Conversion to wiki". If this is not documented by Wednesday, I will remove it. Shii (tock) 01:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Removed. Please find a RS to document the claim "Construction of the Wheat Hole". If this is not documented by Sunday, I will remove it. Shii (tock) 14:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Removed. Please find a RS to document the claim "Funding". If this is not documented by Tuesday, I will remove it. Shii (tock) 12:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Removed. I'm glad people stopped reverting my changes without discussion and thoughtfully discussed this with me. Shii (tock) 04:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Shii, nobody is left to fight you because you've successfully shit-bombed this article, over and over, until you "won". Congratulations, little king - you earned a diet soda and a brave, brave little toaster tin badge. 203.167.141.74 (talk) 11:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome, Jason! Shii (tock) 22:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I have continually removed unsourced content from this page and yet someone keeps putting it back. Shii (tock) 07:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

You're deleting the article by redirection. You can't call that in good faith "removing unsourced content". You proposed deleting the article, but the consensus was "keep", so the article was not deleted. Redirecting the article goes against that consensus. Please stop. - Afiler (talk) 08:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

The consensus was not to delete the article. There is no consensus against redirecting it. "deleting the article by redirection" is inconsistent with how policy is worded. Shii (tock) 12:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

There was no consensus against replacing it with a photo of a pink elephant either, but that doesn't mean you can assume that's in line with the consensus. You may note that in deletion discussions that people sometimes express a preference for merger. In this case, no one suggested that the article should be merged with the Talkeetna article. Even if the consensus had been "merge", what you're doing could not really be considered a merger.

WP:MERGE says that merging should be avoided if "The topics are discrete subjects warranting their own articles, even though they might be short". It doesn't seem like it would be a problem if you made this page much, much shorter. But it seems clear from the deletion discussion and from WP:MERGE that merging is not what is called for. "Merging" to a single sentence feels effectively like deletion. It gives the impression of acting in bad faith considering that you proposed deletion but your proposal failed. - Afiler (talk) 19:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I reduced the article to something that makes sense to me, removing all the stuff that talked about it as a "web 2.0 wiki community". Shii (tock) 04:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

2016 rewrite

I've rewritten this page from scratch to address the following concerns:

• A more encyclopedic tone
• Inline references for every claim
• More secondary sources
• Replacing dead links with archive.org links, or removing them
• Creating a Whole Wheat Radio category on The Commons for related materials

I watched the 2013 edit war from a distance, and was unimpressed with the behaviour of a certain admin. As far as I'm concerned, technical issues (and there were legitimate ones) are forfeited when uncivil behavior is introduced. My hope is we can have a more constructive dialogue now.

Let's turn a new page and get to work. Thanks,
--RubenSchade (talk) 04:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)