Talk:Scientology Network

Evaluate 28 January 2023 version

This is an evaluation of the 28 January 2023 version of this article.

• There are 20 citations, 12 of which are brief articles dated March 11-14, 2018 which is within 3 days of the launch of the channel. In other words, these are basically press releases or short publications in response to a press release (cites 4-16, minus #8). Twelve of these is too many (WP:REFBOMB); two would be sufficient.
• The first actual coverage of the new channel is Vox's March 22 article (cite 1).
• Cites 2, 3 & 8 are nonessential external links, not citations.
• Cites 17-20 cover the purchase of the old KCET Studios property.
• The lead has 8 of these citations, and content mainly listing where you can view the channel. This content isn't in the body of the article and is of limited interest. Between the bluelinks and the citations, the lead gives me eye strain.
• Nine of the press release citations are in the section "Launch" which is a replay of Scientology's press efforts to drum up interest in their new channel. This is not encyclopedic at all. (WP:NOTADVERT)

Of interest to a reader is really just the Five Ws (Who, What, When, Where, Why & sometimes How). In this article I would expect to see: what is its content, who runs it, when did it launch (not how), where is it, what do other people say about it (reviews/response, aka why should I watch it), and how/where can I watch it?

I will work on fixing these points.

Grorp (talk) 00:14, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

 Task complete. Grorp (talk) 03:56, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Image requests

It would be nice if the infobox had a logo for the network, and a screenshot of the channel (as seen online).

A photograph of the facility showing the new name (on a sign, the gate entrance, or a building) could be placed in the 'History' section to illustrate the newly-renamed and renovated property.

Grorp (talk) 03:56, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

It should be the same with KSCN-TV (which was recently taken over in LA) as far as a station/network logo; I know under most circumstances it's allowed but here I am very leery of doing so since it's adjacent to a controversial entity with copyright force. This one we should leave blank. Nate • (chatter) 01:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)