WLNY-TV is currently a Televisiongood article nominee.Nominated bySammi Brie (she/her · t ·c) at 19:27, 13 March 2025 (UTC) Any editor who hasnot nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to thegood article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as agood article. To start the review process, clickstart review and save the page. (See here for thegood article instructions.) Short description: TV station in Riverhead, New York

This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Television:StationsLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles abouttelevision programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you canjoin the discussion.To improve this article, please refer to thestyle guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported bythe Television stations task force (assessed asMid-importance). New York (state)Low‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of theU.S. state ofNew York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. New York CityLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofNew York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale.

Be advised that user BlueboyLINY has engaged in chronic editing of this page without cause. He has previously been banned by moderators for a week because of this behavior.--Vipersage (talk)01:26, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This station vacated channel 55 because they were paid to vacate it early not because they were forced to. There is nothing that prevented them from staying on channel 55 analog broadcasting. They were PAID to leave early.4.142.78.518:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Eric[reply]

I don't mind the feud with Cablevision being pointed out, but shouldn't it be worded better?

Yes...good point. This person has added this type of junk all over this article thats misspelled, has poor grammar and just makes no sense. I just wanted to make a point...probably not the best way to do it...Eklapper20:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this station has been scrolling a message that it is "temporarily off air" for the last 3 or 4 days. can't find anything online explaining why. anyone have any info?— Precedingunsigned comment added by207.237.240.111 (talk)02:51, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever keeps putting upcoming shows in 2015 is considered Crystal Balling. Also, there is a five show limit per article on a television station article.ACMEWikiNet (talk)02:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link onWLNY-TV. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/web/20161017031109/http://www.mdtvsignalmap.com/ tohttp://www.mdtvsignalmap.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set thechecked parameter below totrue orfailed 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 byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC 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 withthis tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)08:21, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BlueboyLI edit summary: "restored digital channels template; removed diginets from affiliate box, these are not traditional networks; the station no longer broadcasts a mobile tv signal"

• no "digital channels template" - I can only guess that you are referring to the wiki link from the infobox to the digital channels, which I understand to be not recommended on WP.
• "removed diginets from affiliate box, these are not traditional networks" - so neither is an independent station a "traditional network" and affiliation also applies to individual syndicated shows, but those are not the main affiliation of a channel. While a programming service or diginet are major/channel wide as My Network TV, which is a programming service (as has Fox and may still be) which might commonly still be considered a network. Diginet also implies network.
• "the station no longer broadcasts a mobile tv signal" - using the fact that the station longer broadcast mobile TV signal to remove information that they no longer do so. You should not wipe out historical information like that. Yes, it isn't in the best place, but we don't have the time frame information.
• Lastly, the change of when the third subchannel started. Given that RabbitEars.info doesn't give the launch date, the most correct is the state "By" the date I check it as it could have been March, April or May (or even further back), thus "late May" is not correct.Spshu (talk)16:56, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As always, my edits are done ingood faith, with the goal of imrpoving an article. These lists of subchannels & affiliations tend to be redundant and clutter the infobox. That is the reason I've linked to the digital channels box in the same way translators are wiki-linked on a radio station's page. If you could, please point me to theWP:MOS that made you "... understand to be not recommended on WP", I'm always looking for input on becoming a better editor, as we all should learn from each other. I removed the mobile listing as the reference now points to a porn site, and the archived site has nothing to do with the original website where the information was posted.BlueboyLI (talk)01:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would like some help with this issue as I don't want to incur another block.@Vipersage: keeps reverting my edits on this and other articles, despite my attempts to get them to discuss on the talk page. For instance they added: "Later that year, the duopoly abandoned the Melville facility altogether." The year meaning 2014, is false. As I posted on Vipersage's talk page, "The facilities were operational until 2018 when the FCC Main Studio Rule was repealed, allowing WLNY's operations to fully consolidate with WCBS-TV." In that same post I explained why they did not provide a reliable source: "To ensure accuracy, please rely onreliable sources. Websites like huntingtonnow.com containuser-generated content and should not be considered a reliable source. Specifically, huntingtonnow.com simply reproduces press releases without fact-checking. Regarding the claim made in one of their press releases: "The 3,000 square footage space had not been used for six years", it is incorrect. As of Vipersages most recentedit, the erroneous information is back. I suspect Vipersage might be aWP:SOCK, but as of now I have no proof. -BlueboyLINY (talk)04:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As evident on this talk page, this user has made no attempt to engage in a dialogue on this or any of his other unnecessary and/or inaccurate edits.Huntington Now is a reputable news site serving the community in which this facility is located. It doesn't contain anymoreuser-generated content thanletters to the editor, all of which are clearly marked as such and have been a common practice in reputable news outlets for hundreds of years.

If this user continues to attempt edit wars with destructive and unnecessary edits, I will continue to escalate this issue to the appropriate moderators.Vipersage (talk)22:10, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Good article nominees
• Good article nominees awaiting review
• Start-Class television articles
• Low-importance television articles
• Start-Class Television stations articles
• Mid-importance Television stations articles
• Television stations task force articles
• WikiProject Television articles
• Start-Class New York (state) articles
• Low-importance New York (state) articles
• Start-Class New York City articles
• Low-importance New York City articles
• WikiProject New York City articles