Battle of Old Fort Wayne

Page contents not supported in other languages.

Fair use rationale for Image:Cumulusmedia.jpg

Image:Cumulusmedia.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cumulus Media. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed 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 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:47, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have a band called ndangered species that they are women beaters the one guy in the band push my head in the steering wheel at 55 miles an hour when he didn't kill me that way he got out and kick me into the head ride massive trauma to the head concussion to the head and close blunt object to the head he will be going to court hopefully goes to prison on the 24th of October you don't need people in your contest that are that bad of people none of them have driver's license none of them have insurance they can't drive each other back and forth we were going to pick it on domestic violence I also have my girlfriend where he fractured her eyeball last summer for no reason he is a mean and hateful person don't trust him Sammy Sam (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Cumulus Media. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:56, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In The News?

Is there a precedent on Wikipedia for company news headlines appearing under a centralized heading? This article is a jumbled mess that mixes company information with news headlines. News headlines need to be a separate item. Please see SONY for an example of how to organize information. Gorba (talk) 09:31, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disputes about the 2020 election memo require a source

An IP editor has been repeatedly adding claims that the memo discussed in the Response to 2020 election fraud claims did not exist, or at least that Mark Levin says that it doesn't exist. There are sources in the article specifically covering the existence of the memo (The New York Times even has extensive quotes), so claims that it did not should not appear here. I have seen some claims in low quality sources suggesting that Mark Levin does deny the existence of the memo, but any claims about Levin require a high-quality source as well. No such source has been provided yet, so that material does not belong in the article. 50.248.234.77 (talk) 21:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Morgan Wallen response

I'm wondering if maybe the 2020 election section should be slightly altered, to "Responses to controversies" or "Responsible actions" or something like that, so things like Cumulus' recent actions towards Morgan Wallen can be included. These days, it seems significant when a major media company like Cumulus takes a stand with respect to misinformation, racism, etc. -- gathering them all into a single section seems logical but I can't come up with a good title. Thoughts? Bookgrrl holler/lookee here 16:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't heard about the relevant incident until I read this comment, and to me it doesn't look like a case of Cumulus Media responding to a controversy, it looks like everybody in music media had the same response to the controversy. I think it's probably undue weight to mention it here, as opposed to Wallen's article that mentions all of the responses. It's certainly true that Cumulus did respond, I just don't see it being a big part of what they're known for. That's in my own opinion, of course. 50.248.234.77 (talk) 08:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cumulus_Media