Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/British television task force/Channels/Archive 2

message: :Would there be any interest amongst the members for a collaberation of the week/fortnight/month/insert-time-period-here type thing to get relevent channels up to featured candidate standard? MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 09:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be interested. Wikiwoohoo 15:15, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Me too </AOL> The JPS 15:43, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

text: And me :)  9cds 12:40, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, so what sort of time period, I'm thinking fortnight, but would you prefer week, month, or whatever? Or we could cop out of making a decision and callit, Collaboration of the Moment :) - Also, any nominations for the first collaboration? MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 09:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Moment" sounds good, becasue of workload in the 'real' world (whatever that is). I've got to spend the next few days deciphering rather vague feedback for a "journal" article I'm working on. The JPS 10:03, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that 'Collaberation of the Moment' sounds best. Keep me posted on what the idea becomes. Wikiwoohoo 15:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Want to pool resources together and work on LIVINGtv2 to begin with? I began the stub earlier when it appeared on the Pending tasks box (it's still there). How about it? Wikiwoohoo 18:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a start. The JPS 15:34, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Collaberation of the (insert word)

message: After seeing the sorry sorry state of Open..., I completely rewrote it from an illiterare stub to a quite large article, but its probably somewhat lacking in some ways still. Its an important piece of British TV history, in my eyes.
The user that originally wrote it left some of the other Sky related pages in an utter state, I completely re-did Sky Sports some months back but he's regressing it now... --Kiand 21:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Open...

message: An anon user with a chip on his shoulder about the closure of CNX has added a lot of POV material to this article. It has been deleted before but has been reinstated, so I suspect deletion will do no good. Does anyone think there is any worthwhile content in the rant that can be edited into something halfway decent? MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 22:49, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Toonami (UK)]] 

message: Are BBC Choice and BBC Knowledge really different to BBC Three and BBC Four? They may have different names and idents, but they carry the same type of programming on the same channel. Its like saying 'five' is a different channel to Channel 5. smurrayinchester(User), (Ho Ho Ho!) 19:25, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, from a legal point of view they are seperate entities rather than a simple rebranding of the same entity such as the channel 5/five example. MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 23:04, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC Choice/Knowledge - Three/Four 

message: I have listed BBC Sport and [[60 Seconds (The BBC Three news update programme) as candidates for Collaboration of the Week. If you would like to vote in favour of them please follow the links for each. In the case of 60 Seconds, it will be rejected tomorrow if it does not recieve one more vote. BBC Sport has longer however. Don't feel you need to vote, since this is the WikiProject for British TV Channels, it's just that they were two articles I believed could do with plenty more information added by others who had a greater knowledge. As such, if you can help with either article, please feel free! Thanks. Wikiwoohoo 20:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hope nobody minds that I basically canvessed for votes for a television programme on the British Television Channels WikiProject. However, BBC Sport has until the 5th of December before its nomination is rejected and only needs one more vote. As User:MrWeeble said, it should be developed to a similar standard as BBC News. Anybody willing to help develop the article? We don't really need it to be accepted, it's just it could really do with a lot of help. Wikiwoohoo 20:31, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration of the Week Candidates 

message: -> This copyright tag was found recently (it has already been in existence for just under a month now). It is the best tag to use for screenshots of television programmes and idents.Wikiwoohoo 21:05, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Television Screenshot Copyright Tag 

message: Having just received the first feedback on the Peer Review for BBC World, here is a little invitation for somebody to create a Television infobox since the UK+ROI version doesn't apply to the channel. There does not appear to be an infobox with no specific matter that would apply for BBC World so if anyone could create one and post it on my test page that would be great. Thanks a lot in advance! :) Wikiwoohoo 20:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What about Infobox Network? I've put an example on the Test page. smurrayinchester(User), (Ho Ho Ho!) 09:27, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Perfect, cheers! Wikiwoohoo 19:56, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[BBC World]] 

message: I have updated the main infobox to take advantage of some new functionality in the mediawiki software. Now you do not need to include all 4 channels (even if they are blank), you only need to include the ones you need - and you can now have up to TWENTY! (which should be enough - if more are needed it is now trivial to extend the template).
Also the "terr services=2" or whatever are now almost redundant, they are only needed if the service is unavailable (to display the "not available" message) otherwise it can be anything.
No changes need to be made to any current implementations of the template it should be 100% backwards compatible.– MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 14:22, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated Infobox 

message: I have expanded the BBC Weather page quite a bit. However, does anyone have the current ident (the glass ball with the clouds/rain/snow inside)? All the page currently has is a long, thin logo from their website and an old 1930s/40s ident. smurrayinchester(User), (Ho Ho Ho!) 22:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A Google Image search came up with this screenshot, among others, which suggests there isn't an actual 'logo' beyond the stripe. Although it could be useful to includo that screenshot? 9cds 23:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC Weather 

message: I've realised there doesn't appear to be a british tv shows wikiproject out there, to try and improve the quality of tv show acticles. Does anyone think it's worth having one, if I create one?  9cds 04:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds reasonable; a lot of the articles on BritTV shows are in need of clean-up and expanding and it would be good to have a place to co-ordinate this. If you start it, I'd join. smurrayinchester(User), (Ho Ho Ho!) 10:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, created. It's over at Wikipedia:WikiProject British TV shows - 9cds 12:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New wikiproject? 

message: FYI there is a proposal that this category be renamed :Category:Television stations in the United Kingdom. See discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Television stations sub-cats. – MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 11:37, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:British television channels]] 

message: We currently have monthly ratings data from the BARB - based on the slightly skewed multichannel homes figures. The total viewing reach figures are available here, and are updated weekly - not that anyone would be expected to actually do this...
These sometimes give a better interpretation of audience than a figure - for instance, Kerrang! TV has a weekly reach of 1,224,000 people but a 0.1% audience share - but it actually means that 4.1% of homes watched it at some stage in the previous week.
Anyone any comments on this? --Kiand 23:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weekly Reach 

message: Granada Plus was renamed G Plus, by a known vandal. I am requesting that it be moved back to it's original (and best known) name of Granada Plus, which needs approval as it requires a page deletion to enable it. please add your support at talk:G Plus (or tell me how wrong I am - if you like) MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 14:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Granada Plus 

message: I think we should add Infoboxes to all of ITV Companies or make a special infobox for the ITV Companies. --RaptorX 17:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Infoboxes to the ITV Companies 

message: Is there no way to size the logo in the infoboxes? Nickelodeon UK's looks ugly as it is.. -- 9cds(talk) 03:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo size in infobox 

message: Hello everyone. This may seem like a daft question but just to make sure i don't tread on anyone's toes, how does a user join this project? Do I just add my name to the project page and get on with it, or is there some other procedure? I've already edited a few tv channel articles so would be good to get more closely involved. -Matthew Humphreys 14:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's all there is to it, although you'll probably also want to watch the project page, to keep an eye on the latest news. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 14:15, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, thanks :-) -Matthew Humphreys 14:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Go for it! You're more than welcome to. :) Wikiwoohoo 18:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Joining the project

message: I've updated Wikipedia:WikiProject_British_TV_channels to show Infobox TV channel rather than UK-ROI TV channel infobox which shouldn't be used now for any articles. Cheers, AntzUK  16:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we remove Template:UK-ROI TV channel infobox as it shouldn't be used in any articles (as far as i'm aware)? --AntzUK  17:00, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was used, for a long and boring reason, involving me editing the box one way such that it required a dummy parameter, so I was migrating all the channels to use the new box by additing the parameter. Then User:Netoholic and I got into a bit of an edit war over the box and how to handle conditionals, I got bored with it all and basicly said "fuck it". Looking at the controversy at WP:AUM I can see that the basic consensus is that he was talking bollocks all along, so I may move the template to a better version that uses proper conditionals. However it appears that they have all been migrated to the new template regardless. Oh well. MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 11:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox TV channel 

message: Someone may be interested in cleaning up Game Network. I gave it a whack, but it needs a lot more work. Cheers. --Fang Aili 21:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI 

message: I have updated the collaberation as there has not been much activity on LivingTV 2 for a while. I have changed it to MTV UK as this channel, which is one of the main channels in multichannel homes and the flagship channel for MTV in Europe, is currently a rather pathetic stub. – MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 11:29, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaberation of the Moment 

message: I've made an article dedicated to Cartoon Network (UK). I copied the content from the main Cartoon Network article's UK and Ireland section and added an infobox. --AntzUK 15:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartoon Network 

message: has been nominated for deletion (correctly, this time). The template is very useful and also 'traps' unsubstantaited articles (rumoured shows and episodes can be verified and dealt with if they are in one place, but not if they are lost in one of the huge categories). The JPS 18:40, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|Future tvshow}} 

message: Is the use on this page fair use? Seems the guy who deleted it has a habit of deleting many images. -- 9cds(talk) 14:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect he's right, I'm afriad. We weren't using it in an article about BBC One. The JPS talk to me 14:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is the case, would that also apply to the Rapture TV logo on the infobox at the top of this page? tghe-retford 18:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right -- I've removed it. 'Fair use' is not synonymous with 'free use'. There's a discussion going on (though it seems to have stalled) about whether screenshots from TV shows can be used in articles about the actors. My own belief is that yes, so long as the article discusses the source of the image. The JPS talk to me 16:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of BBC One logo. 

message: Take a look at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Upcoming_television_shows_to_Category:Upcoming_television. A few people a suggestion that this cat be renamed to 'programs' -- a US-centric spelling. "Shows" is neutral. The JPS talk to me 16:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CfD 

message: Should we get a new Collaboration of the Moment? MTV UK seems to be sorted reasonably well.
In other news, I've made QVC (UK) and Hallmark Channel (UK). I'll try and do more soon (when I have time) but if anyone can help with the others it would be great. Cheers, AntzUK 17:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been bold and made Hallmark Channel into a new one, it is a fairly major channel so we should  be able to expand it considerably. MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 13:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Collaboration of the Moment? 

message: Will do one for ITV aswell.
--Quentin Smith 07:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - do you think we could get it a bit smaller? And a heading? The JPStalk to me 10:27, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done my own suggestions. What are your reasons for creating this template, Quentin? Some navigational templates are useful because they present the data ina different way to the categories (chronological as opposed to alphabetical, for instance). At the moment I don't get what this is doing over the cat. The JPStalk to me 10:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Something I've made

message: Just to verify with other people, someone has suggested that the :Category:Television channels in the United Kingdom and :Category:Defunct British television channels renamed from channels to stations. If this were to be accepted, virtually everything with channel in it (including the title of this Wikiproject) would have to change to station. Can someone just confirm my thoughts that UK based articles should use TV channel rather than TV station? --tgheretford (talk) 07:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. 'Station' is an Americanism. -- 9cds(talk) 08:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: (Discussion here. -- 9cds(talk) 08:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See also a discussion from last year here. – MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 12:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  British TV Channels/Stations? 

message: Anyone interested in giving them a makeover? I've had a stab at Kiss TV and give a logo to The Box, but we are missing FHM TV and Smash Hits TV. Magic TV and Q TV looks very thin. Marbles333 18:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Further that, Chart Show Channels also need a bit of a re-jig. I have done Flaunt today. Marbles333 19:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emap TV Channels 

message: I have made a start on Nick Jr. (UK), for those who actually know anything but basic knowledge about the channel. --Thelb4 09:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tidied it up a little and made National Geographic Channel (UK). Most of the information and programming is from the main article so if anyone could clear some of that that would be great. --AntzUK 15:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I've also made Toon Disney (UK). --Thelb4 16:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nick Jr. 

message: Shouldn't this be renamed 'List of television channels in the United Kingdom'? It looks a bit out of place. --AntzUK 12:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of British television channels - rename? 

message: I've made a UK version of the future TV channel template seeing as 'television station' and 'television network' aren't generally used in the UK and in this project. --AntzUK 17:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, and it would probably help this project to keep an eye on relevant articles. The JPStalk to me 17:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:Future UK channel 

message: On Six TV's frontpage, it now mentions both Portsmouth and Reading in their broadcast area. This is recent, I've never seen that there before, but the schedules only mention Oxford and Southampton. Do we have confirmation whether it is broadcasting there or not? 
This would make all 5 SIX TV liscences active. Marbles333 19:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Six TV]] now in Reading and Portsmouth? 

message: I have seen a number of articles reverted because editors have been putting programmes in good faith onto UK channel articles, only to see their changes removed soon after by other editors who say that the programmes were not notable enough. The programmes being added are notable TV programmes worthy of a Wikipedia article but not notable for a place on a list of notable programmes on a UK channel article.
Is there a definitve list of what makes a programme be included on a list of notable programmes on a UK channel article, for example high viewing figures, publicity of the programme or a programmes status and notability in society? --tgheretford (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment there isn't a guide because it hasn't really been a problem before. The ITV4 war is pretty lame.  User:Square eyes seems to only want to add a few more shows, , and the list is not overly huge. If it becomes a problem on other articles, then we'll have to come up with a guide, but for now, we'll get the two warring parties to discuss it on the talk page. The JPStalk to me 16:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's happening with ITV2  and ITV3  as well. --tgheretford (talk) 17:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the point in having a FULL list of the programes shown on the channel, it is un-needed. If user look in the External links section, then they'll see the programmes shown. I have now created an article for the ITV digital programmes: List of programmes on ITV digital channels --GMc 15:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree. Huge lists make the article look unsightly to be honest and could easily be replaced by a list article or category as I've found most useful. Wikiwoohoo 19:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ironically the compromise now faces deletion. It seems certain that the lists on every channel article which details the programmes will have to be removed, this will also have to apply to every radio station too. The reason given is that lists of programmes violates Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not yet Wikipedia is  also an almanac. If lists of programmes have to be deleted from articles, it will have to be applied to all radio stations too. --tgheretford (talk) 18:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable programmes on channel articles 

message: There has been a debate at Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals for a TV and Radio barnstar which covers extradionary contributions for TV and radio. The design has already been finalised for the TV barnstar. Probably a no brainer, but I will ask if the barnstar can be used by us for the British TV channels wikiproject. Maybe something to award people who make valuable contributions to the project. --tgheretford (talk) 21:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TV Barnstar 

message: Someone deleted the original userbox because it contravened userbox guidance, which states that according to The German Solution userboxes should be created in user space. I have done this as best I can and from what I remember of the original userbox into my userspace. --tgheretford (talk) 10:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox 

message: I've noticed that programmes shown on the ITV Network (Coronation Street etc) are being labelled as being on "ITV1". Shouldn't it really say "ITV1/STV/UTV" as 'ITV1' is the name in England and Wales only? -- Edits  AntzUK  Talk  15:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A simliar debate occured on the Freeview article to the name of Channel 3 (UK), originally whether it should be called ITV or ITV1 but it expanded because ITV1 is only used in England, Wales, Southern Scotland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. In that scenario we agreed on a comprimise of ITV1/STV/UTV. That debate which deals with the ITV1/STV/UTV compromise can be found here: Talk:Freeview/Archive 1#ITV or ITV1 Straw Poll --tgheretford (talk) 17:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "ITV1" on programme articles 

message: This user looks as if they have been removing the word "Channel" from the availability box from certain articles. I know its picky, but the word "channel" is there to differenciated between manual tune options and EPG positions. The user has also inserted unsourced statements in some articles. Marbles333 19:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And they are still removing the word "channel" from some articles an hour and a half after you asked them to stop. I dunno what to suggest to be honest. Whether removing the word could be classed as vandalism? Not sure unless there is consensus that the word "channel" should be used in the infobox template. (talking of that template, I don't know whether anyone knows, but someone is suggesting a merge of the UK channel infobox into the TV network infobox (sorry to drop that little bombshell)). --tgheretford (talk) 19:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I shall look at the merge request shortly. Jeez, the nerve of some people! (BTW I reverted all of his edits that s/he has made so far, although I did notice some incorrect statements, for example I saw one saying that Sky Television, not BSkyB, was the owner of Sky Movies. When I go back to them, I shall revert them) Apart from that, the user only seems to have added extra NTL LCN's and those for NTL IrelandMarbles333 20:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "Channel" from EPG Positions 

message: There is a problem with Template:Infobox ITV franchisee. On the articles it is used on, the area and the owner details are appearing above the article as well as in the infobox, for example, on the Associated TeleVision article, the following appears before the main body of text:
Londonweekends 1955-1968
Midlandsweekdays 1956-1968
Midlands all week 1968-1981|
I believe it is affecting the area and owner sections of the infobox. If there is anyone who knows the code for the infobox could fix the problem. It has only just occured, I read these articles earlier and there was no problem earlier today. --tgheretford (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, the user who wanted to add a owner field to the template has reverted their changes. --tgheretford (talk) 17:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious problem with ITV Franchise infobox