Talk:Logos of Viacom
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 2005-12-28. The result of the discussion was keep. |
I just feel obliged to say that this is without doubt the coolest article in the entire encyclopedia. The V of Doom... The Purple V of Death... remarkable. Amazing!
I can't fathom why anyone would want to delete anything having to do with a V of Doom. Glad this one didn't end up in the trash bin. Just expressing my opposition to the idea just in case it comes up again.
-Zeroinbarnotation
Contents |
[edit] IRRELEVANT TO WIKIPEDIA!
The users who decided to keep this article should seriously reconsider being part of the editing process. Articles such as this and the one on Screen Gems should be eliminated as they ruin the intregity of Wikipedia. Yes I'm a logospotter myself, but I also think that such things have their places for discussion, and Wikipedia is not the place for the discussion. I am prepared to renominate for deletion again. --James Stanley Barr 06:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- That's totally weak. There have been entries on Wikipedia devoted to far more trivial matters (hello, Saved By The Bell?). Integrity and objectivity are important to Wikipedia, yes, but these goals don't have to lead to the suppression of information. That's not what the Internet is about, and I dare say that's not what Wikipedia is about either.--Jess Ragan
- What does having an article on this type of thing have to do with making it "a place for discussion"? I know that Wikipedia is not a discussion forum, but I see nothing in this article that makes it "a place for discussion". (Or does it have a meaning here that I seem to be missing?) --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oh please...--The_stuart 01:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Good grief! You can (and do) discuss ANYTHING on Wikipedia! 71.111.209.99 22:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a 'What Most People Find Interesting'opedia. If that were the case, we would have deleted 90% of our physics-related articles because "nobody thinks they're interesting". SushiGeek 18:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, let's keep the physics articles and keep this one as well. 71.111.216.239 15:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] POV problem
While I will stay away from someone's belief that this article should go because WP:NOT a discussion forum, and this could become a discusion, I will note that some of this article seems to be against the original version of the fancy-cut V. This is not a neutral point of view. There is no dispute, and I could be wrong (but I doubt that) about the POV, but adjectives like "infamous", "frightening", and "dreaded" should be considered POV. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that this article could be made NPOV by modifying the terminology or attributing the terms to individuals (or at least "some people think/say..."). I still think it is an interesting article, and worthy of being in Wikipedia. I wish the description of the issues was clearer, especially the description of the V itself and the way it produced nightmares, etc. --Cromwellt|Talk 20:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I personally do not like the original "V of Doom" (an affectionate nickname for the original Viacom logo). I thought that the "Letters" were the scariest thing of my life. But now, I am older and see the light. If you delete this, you might have broken the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. You shouldn't mess around with something and call it a POV problem. Leave the article alone! 206.211.69.253 12:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- Uh, we are not talking about deleting it... we did that, and it was kept. We are actually referring to the terminology used in the article, and how it can be made NPOV. It will not vanish anytime soon. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh. Thanks a lot, guys. You make many people very happy. 206.211.69.253 12:15, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Is there anyway I can help? Just say that in the early days of each logo, some viewers found it terrifying. 206.211.69.253 17:52, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 1976 Viacom logo
Oh, boy! I'm still mad about this! How about on March 25, 2006, I, Shadeed Aquil Kelly, was watching the last of The Twilight Zone on WOLO-TV ABC Columbia channel 25, waiting to see what logo will it be. Either the 1990 Viacom wigga-wigga logo, the Paramount Domestic Television logo from 1995, or for the first time, the CBS Paramount Television logo. Of all logos that had to appear on television, IT HAD TO BE THAT STUPID 1976 VIACOM "V" OF DOOM LOGO! "A Viacom Presentation" with that creepy music! That logo gave me the creeps back when I was 4, 5, and 6 after watching The Andy Griffith Show on WLTX-TV CBS channel 19 when it went off at 11:30 p.m. That logo surprised me and I was upset! I HATE THAT STUPID LOGO! King Shadeed 18:15 8 May, 2006 (UTC)
[edit] It doesn't say this:
Why did nobody add about how the logo was scary? I'm talking about the Purple V of Doom.
- See above and read mine King Shadeed 19:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Blanking / Redirect
Why did Tregoweth blank and redirect this page to Viacom without nominating it for deletion first? He nominated it for deletion a year ago, the consensus was overwhelmingly to keep, but now it's been effectively deleted again by him. Jkatzen 07:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
