Talk:G4 (TV channel)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
TV This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, which collaborates on television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia.
This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute.
Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles.

Contents

[edit] Response to Criticism

I added this section because we needed more balance in the discussion. I like Tech and Video Game programming too, but they needed to change to stay alive. It's business. Just like how I poop in my pants so I can change my underwear. It's common sense.


If there is a response to criticism, there needs to be verifiable evidence that changes were needed. Several former TechTV staffers (how admittedly might be biased) have said that TechTV's ratings were much stronger than G4s and were continually going up when G4 bought them. Martin Sargeant has said that Unscrewed was canceled simply because the one of the higher-ups at G4 just didn't "get" the show not because of low ratings. Jccalhoun 21:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No critisisms section?

63.192.190.120 08:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC) The entire channel has had a rehaul, every old fan of it is speaking against it, the takeover and termination of many of TechTV's employees... I think it's time this page got a criticism section. It's basically now like what MTV did, and that page has one. Banzai and Triumph are coming as well. I say we start one.

Hakusa - Wiki addict: 03:47, September 5, 2005 (UTC) While I was thinking of adding one, after all I don't know one person who is peticularly happy with its programs, but I realized without a refference it might likely be deleted swiftly. So I thought mabe I could post here first and get the deleters opinion about it. Please not that if a critisism section was added by me, I would agrue both sides. Also I wanted to ask if posting that "no liable refferences were found, but take it to the talk page before deleting," would be a good idea.

After hearing that G4 is adding bring about the man show we need a critisims section ASAP. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.252.164.29 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 28 September 2005.
I agree wholeheartedly. G4 is widely criticized for its focus on celebrities than gaming. --Phil 01:36, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
I also agree. As someone who loves video games and technology, I find it amazing how utter unwatchable their programming is. Between the controversy of the merger and the highly-debatable quality (or rather, lake thereof) of the channel itself there should be plenty to write a criticisms section on.--Daveswagon 09:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
This is a factual article unless you can get a news article and/or some facts based on this it should not appear. Wikipedia despite what you may think is a for reference and therefor must be factual Mike 13:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Considering that G4 is a semi-obscure, niche market cable channel, it's unlikely that there will be any full-blown newspaper articles on the quality and merits of the channel (most people simply don't care). I was able to find the following negative press/blogs/postings simply by Googling "g4tv". I think it may say something that I was able to find negative material so easily with an unbiased search term. http://igo.ampednews.com/news/3151/</nowiki, <nowiki>http://www.joystiq.com/2005/12/28/g4tv-vs-mtv-for-gamers/, http://joystiq.com/2005/12/13/g4-cancels-two-shows-revamps-a-third/, http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2841, http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=G4TV, http://www.stumbleupon.com/url/www.g4tv.com/, http://www.g4tv.com/screensavers/features/50635/Two_minutes_with_Farkcoms_Drew_Curtis.html (bottom of page) --Daveswagon 05:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I dont think we need a whining section about how everyone misses techtv Mike 04:30, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not a "whining" section. It's a legit topic with legit concerns. I believe we should add one. iKato 01:48, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Everyone is right, there needs to be a criticism section. After all, how can they call themselves the "Video Game Network", when the majority of their shows have nothing to do with video games?71.96.11.37 23:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edited

The statement: "The name G4 comes from the network's main subject material: Games, Gear, Gadgets, and Gigabytes (4 Gs)" is incorrect. According to the G4 FAQ (written by AGN himself):"G4 stands for 4 generations of games, Text, Sprites, Poly, Textures and 4 Game platforms PC, Console, Handheld, Arcade." Link to FAQ on mainpage.

  • The 4 Gs in question are the 4 Gs of G4techTV. --Lbmixpro 02:55, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

The link referring to the show, "Players" incorrectly points to a Dick Wolf production of the same name. Someone should set up a page. --Metron4 21:17, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Message Boards and Website

You guys do know that the message boards and the website are completely seperate? People who use the forum usually do not like the TV show! They should be seperated. And Off-Topic should be seperated, because they are really their own special group.

[edit] Merging

Do we need to merge G4 (television) and TechTV into G4TechTV? OR do we let them be? (Please Respond on This talk page to keep it in one place. Ilyanep 17:54, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

No don't. Use TechTV to describe pre-WWII--I meam pre-merger TechTV, and G4TechTV to discuss the merger and the channels during the time of the merger. Don't forget to include the tensions on the forum. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.1.34.21 (talk • contribs).
I'd have to agree without merging them. In all reality, each network is different from each other, TechTV being an entire different product which has no actual relationship with G4 than being bought by Comcast, making each of the three entries specific to that time in the channels lives. Chris 16:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New page?

Is a new page necessary for pre-G4techTV and post-G4techTV? I mean, G4 pre-TechTV was available in less than 15 million homes, and post-G4techTV was available in over 50 million homes. Other changes too, like logos and shows should be considered for a separate page. --Mrmiscellanious 03:14, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It's the same name and essentially the same channel, so I say it should stay here. This article is very short and the current information could easily fit in a new section of a larger text. See the NBC article for how we could document the changes to the logo (if there have been enough changes). I think the best layout for the page would be a section for each major change in G4, with a section for the pre-TechTV era, a paragraph or two on the G4techTV merged channel, with a link to the G4techTV article as the main article (as seen in the Germany article: "Main article: History of Germany", but "Main article: G4techTV" under the G4techTV section header). - MattTM | talk 03:55, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discontinued shows

I added discontinued shows that were previously on G4tv, but have been cancelled. Shows that never made it to G4 weren't added, they can stay on the TechTV page. Good, yes?

[edit] Unprotected

Trial unprotect--I'm watching and will reluctantly restore protection if the vandalism resumes. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 15:36, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Errgh...

Sorry to allow it to happen, but a friend who barrowed my laptop, used my account to vandalize the logo here.

Sorry.

[edit] Suggestion for article protection

Due to a recent story at digg.com http://www.digg.com/technology/TechTv_is_NOT_Coming_Back._G4_turing_into_new_SpikeTv., I believe it'd be wise to protect this article for a while. (23:36, 27 Sep 2005 (U.S. Central))

It deserves to be vandalised. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.252.164.29 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 28 September 2005.
A notable development (including one of a controversial nature) is an excellent reason to make certain that a page is not protected. This is an encyclopedia, and such information should be included. Aside from added attention where/when it's warranted, vandalism should not be dealt with proactively. —Lifeisunfair 22:18, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
It keeps getting vandaled I think semi protection for a little bit is a good idea. Mike 21:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Call for Help

There needs to be a concensus reached about the condition of the show, i.e. whether its "Still airing, now produced by G4techTV Canada" or simply "Now produced by G4techTV Canada". I'm tired of seeing this revert war on my Watchlist and it's not helping the article at all. ~ Hibana 00:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Its fixed now and its ok. Mike Beckham 02:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anime Unleashed is gone

Therefore it is irrelavant to have the CRTC comment on any G4 related Wiki pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Grahambrunk (talk • contribs).

[edit] DO NOT Remove Content

Please do not remove shows or move them to former shows if they are not cancelled or if they are scheduled to return. Mike Beckham 01:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What is the current status on Anime Unleashed?

Has the big announcement happened yet about what exactly is going to happen to it? Keep me posted. --AyrtonSenna 18:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-Protect?

Can this article be semi-protected again for a while? It's being vandalised alot. Mike Beckham 00:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed! I just got though reverting information again. Chris 15:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where's Arena?

I thought g4 was still airing arena reruns. but what happened?

It's gone. 24.188.203.181 20:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] G4's Training Camp

it was still airing on G4 but where it go?134.124.93.232 16:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Similarites to spike?

should it be mentioned that it's similar to Spike TV? I mean take a look at the shows.

See spike is absolutly intented for male viewers and just look at the shows. Totally Outrages Behavior (which is bassicly the same as worlds amazing videos and most amazing cop videos), Man Show, and I'm pretty sure it's the only other channel that runs reruns of Star Trek: The Next Generation besides spike.

[edit] Comcast gives up on G4

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6159802.html --Elven6 00:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bring back the show list

I liked the shows list :)

[edit] Is G4 altering the article?

I was just wondering if it's possible that G4's altering it's article to make people think that it's not that bad of a channel. My two reasons for thinking this is that 1) G4 is fully aware of wikipedia (they mention it all the time) and 2) Sometimes, the critisism article sometimes is removed or very shortend or misleading. --Uber Cuber (User:68.43.180.69)

Your contributions to the criticism section[1][2] were poorly worded, unsourced point-of-view. This is why they were removed, not because of a G4techTV conspiracy to silence all dissidents. I realize that you want to go around exclaiming, as a concrete example, "Naruto Sucks", however Wikipedia generally desires its contributions to be more encyclopedic in nature. –Gunslinger47 00:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, my brother wrote that. I would like to apologise to all Naruto fans offended. Also, I mainly ment that sometimes the critisims section is missing and everything on it is positive and/or biased. --Uber Cuber

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/4/_/Talk%7EG4_%28TV_channel%29_2411.html"