Talk:American Broadcasting Company

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

American Broadcasting Company is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
May 25, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Questions from 2002-2003

I'm unhappy with the page as it currently is. There are literally pages of info on a corporate merger (which never actually took place), and little info on, say, company history (outside of one planned merger). Nothing is mentioned of ABC's ratings through the years, what programs were offered, corporate information, etc, etc.

Right now, the article is dominated by a 1,100 word POV essay. Stuff like:

"accusatory and nasty tone" "The Commission majority was not impressed by ITT's dishonesty, manipulation of the press..."

doesn't belong in this article.

Frankly, much of the ITT stuff could be edited out, as this article concerns ABC, not ITT, a company which did not merge with ABC.

--Firsfron 01:19, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Done, and done. I reduced the ITT mention to all of two short paragraphs, combined that section into a common 1960s section, and shorted the bits about Roone Arledge (that sort of thing belongs in his personal article, not here IMO). There's also a start on a 1970s section (I can't believe there's all that blab about ITT and not one mention of Roots or Happy Days); there's no mention of Fred Silverman there yet because I wasn't sure where he fit in. -lee 09:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I think it's an excellent start, Lee. Thanks for the contrib. Looks 100% better already! :)--Firsfron 03:30, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)


will this page concentrate on ABC Radio or ABC TV?

Apparently, neither. It seems to be focusing on the corporate history, particularly mergers. If you know anything about ABC's radio or TV programming, please tell us all! :-) --Ed Poor

Are the references to American Broadcasting Corporation in this article factually incorrect? --Minesweeper 05:28, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)

I'd say so. ABC was American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. (or in some cases Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.) before its merger with Disney. -lee 10:03, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] explaining revert

The fact that this entity is owned by the Walt Disney Company is mentioned in the article and in the article's catigorization. Therefore, the additions to the see also section are unnecessary. Gentgeen 06:12, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article title

This is the only one of the 3 oldest North American television networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) that has an article by its full name rather than its initials, the reason being dis-ambiguation is needed. However, can anyone discuss ABC network as a logical article title?? Does that name have dis-ambiguation in its meaning?? 66.245.123.24 23:14, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

There are ABC networks in other countries, Australia, e.g., unless American Broadcasting Company is doing harm, it is probably best left. dml 01:35, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Verification of information

A new revision of the logo its scheduled for 2007.

Where did this information come from? This would be major TV news, since the ABC logo is one of the most recognized TV logos. A search came up empty.

It's merely that new Glossy version. ViperSnake151 12:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Overhaul of this article

I'm not sure how it happened, but somehow this article has lept from a discusion of ABC to a discussion of an incident which occurred in the 1960's. The ITT affair now dominates this article. I'd like to request that the ITT portions be deleted, shortened, or removed, as this 6 paragraph long section has almost nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I'd rather see a discussion of ABC's programming throughout the years, etc.

[edit] Opposition to chapter title

The chapter about the absorption of Capital/ABC into Disney is named 'Merger with Disney'. The Walt Disney Company did not merge with Capital/ABC, Capital/ABC became a part of The Walt Disney Company. Can anyone think of a better name than this? Speedway, 19:23, 25 Jan 05

In today's world of finance, that distinction is really no longer meaningful. 18.26.0.18 21:33, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Technically, Disney and CapCities/ABC did merge. A new company was created and incorporated when the two companies combined, although the Disney name was kept.--Plainsong 02:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] It's "companies" not "company"

The corporate name is still plural.

[edit] ABC

What about information relating to the Australia ABC?

Well, our ABC (I'm Australian, you see), does have its own article, and as I often relish in pointing out, the proper ABC (sorry, I'm getting carried away with this), that is, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (originally Australian Broadcasting Commission), was established in 1932, 11 years before the American one, so why isn't our's more well-known? Because the American one comes from the US, doesn't it? You just don't care whose feelings you hurt...
Cyvros, a bloody proud Australian

[edit] Parent company

NBC now has a parent company of NBC Universal and CBS now has a parent company of CBS Corporation. Any stories yet about the future of this network being part of a parent company called "ABC something"?? Georgia guy 02:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Daytime ("One Life to Live")

I edited the blurp about One Life To Live. It seems too POV to me. Yes, it was socially conscious, but it didn’t really make ABC daytime "a success" (like the previous passage stated). It actually got low/mediocre ratings in its early days. OLTL didn’t become a ratings winner until the early ‘80s. And why single it out from all the others when discussing the daytime lineup? It makes no sense.

[edit] Requested move

ABC (United States) → American Broadcasting Company – Page moved today by an inexperienced (and brand-new!) editor unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies, including the idea that the title of the article about a company should generally be the actual name of the company. I left a message for the user, as have others who noticed some other strange page moves, but the damage has been done. Also causes many double redirects. Please fix Crumbsucker 11:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • Support - It's the companys name and there are thousands of pages which link to the proper name rather than here. -Ladybirdintheuk 15:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - This page was moved to "ABC (United States)" without consensus and without regard for the actual name of the company. People will search for "American Broadcasting Company", not "ABC (United States)". Ridiculous and harmful move which has caused countless double redirects, none of which were fixed by the editor who moved the page, despite the warning that such a move might cause double redirects. Judging from this user's talk page, he has been moving many controversial pages like this. I've temporarily removed the notice at the top of the article, because it makes no sense in the context of the current page, but will happily replace it when this article is moved back.--Firsfron of Ronchester 16:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - Acronyms should always be expanded, except in very rare circumstances (i.e. SPAM), or where it has become part of a larger term (i.e. RCA connector). I would ask an admin to make this a "speedy move" since it was done improperly in the first place, and is apparently blocked by an intermediate move.  –radiojon 17:35, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll second Radiojon's request for a "speedy move": I just checked "What links here", and at least 3,000 pages now point to a double redirect page. :( --Firsfron of Ronchester 17:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support as per pretty much everyone else. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Fix a mistake, no harm done (not too much). --Dhartung | Talk 07:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments
  • Please show that the word name is still legally used. Georgia guy 16:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure that's required. It's certainly not called "ABC (United States)". According to the article, the formal name of the company that operates the network is American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. --Firsfron of Ronchester 16:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disney Era

The 'Disney Era' section and the latter part of the 'Acquisition by Disney' sections are identicle. Should we delete one of those sections? 66.69.244.129 22:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aaron Spelling and his contribution to ABC's success

Especially now with his recent passing, I am surprised that no mention is made of Aaron Spelling and his vast contribution to the fortunes of the network. At one point in time up to a third of the programs on air were from his stable: Charlie's Angels, The Love Boat, Beverly Hills 90210, Melrose Place, etc. etc. They even joked that ABC meant "Aaron's Broadcasting Company" :) -- Jalabi99 06:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Add most-watched programs of the network per season since 2001-2002?

I recently added a table of the most-watched programs of the network of the 2001-2002 season. I meant to include the TV seasons following 2001-2002, up until the present. However, another Wiki user had deleted it shortly thereafter. My question to anyone here is should tables of the most-watched programs per season since 2001-2002 be included? I believe that such an addition is informative and an interesting read. Let me know what you think. -- Dechnique23 00:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logos and Idents Gone!!!!!!!!!!!!

What happened to the logos and idents for ABC?

Response to Q. "What happened to the logos and idents for ABC" - Were there copyright issues involved in posting the older ABC logos? If not, was there suspected vandalism? Or someone affiliated with ABC removed/asked for removal of the logos? lwalt 18:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

There is already an article about ABC logos see: American Broadcasting Company logos. AxG (talk) m. xmas 18:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2004 Presidential Election

Anyone find that seciton a bit odd? I thought about maybe re-wording it, but I wasn't sure. It seems to critisie ABC for not providing 'equal coverage' to Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton, presumably compared to candiadtes such as Howard Dean and John Kerry. Since it is widely accepted that the three were 'vanity candidates' who had little to no chance of winning the nomination, isn't it logical for the network to focus more emphasis on more viable candidates who the public are more interested in? It happens every primary season on both sides, notice how Hillary and Obama are getting much more coverage than say, Mike Gravel, etc. --IvanKnight69 12:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Current schedule - problem

There is a new tag available to alert editors to cleanup schedules, which is {{schedule}}. I could tag the article because it does have a current schedule for ABC, but I would rather bring it up here first, to see if consensus can be met. As people may be aware, current TV schedules are unencyclopedic as per WP:NOT#DIR, can be difficult to be kept up to date and therefore redundant to TV Guides, which are updated fairly quickly. They can also be original research and if copied and pasted from an external source, a copyright violation. If you believe the WP:NOT policy on schedules is wrong, you should discuss it there. --tgheretford (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

One of the points I've made in the past regarding the schedules is that the specific times should be kept out, as they slip the descriptive information from an encyclopedic measure into a TV Guide-like measure, which indeed is a violation of WP:NOT. --Mhking 21:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The reason I made the schedules was to highlight the types of shows the network is airing. In my opinion, it is best represented in a day and time format with the colors, but anything outside the box (besides late night and maybe hiatus shows) is not needed. Unfortunately, people feel the need to add every premiere that is coming up, which should not happen on Wikipedia. The only way to police that is to just delete it any time it is added, which I have been trying to do to a certain extent. bmitchelf•T•F 05:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The schedule coloring seems kinda painful to me. Take a look at this schedule from another article. You might want to adopt (or adapt) it. Alsee (talk) 22:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The newest version of the ABC logo

I've added the current ABC logo. The one in use was the old one. The new one is, for a lack of a better term, "shinier" than previous incarnations. Jason.cinema 03:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

To the person who reverted ABC's logo on the article page back to the previous one, please take a look at ABC.com. The network is using the "shinier" logo and has been for some time now, thus it's the current ABC logo. Jason.cinema 07:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:ABClogo.jpg

Image:ABClogo.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 Wikipedia articles 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.

If there is other 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 15:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

A fair use rationale has been added. Jason.cinema 02:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The constant misuse of the old ABC logo

To those who keep reverting ABC's new logo to the old one, please stop. One only has to go to ABC.com to notice that the network is no longer using the plain logo, but are using the "shinier" one, and have been for some time. I'll leave this in the hands of the editors, but I always thought accuracy and transparency were paramount virtues to be had. Please stop reverting this page's logo to the old ABC logo.

[edit] Just For Laughs

ABC has had a commecial for maybe 3 weeks for what they call a new series I checked the article but all I found was a festival of sorts. Just For Laughs [[User:The New Mikemoral|<font color="red">The New</font> [[User Talk:The New Mikemoral|Mikemoral</font>]]]] 17:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC) ABC mentioned wikipedia, I got a laugh, too. It was about people supporting their candidate in wikipedia! Fineday 05:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that in some of the promos for this show, that it was taped in MONTREAL!!!...especially after you see a fleeting pass of a Canada Post postal service truck in the background in the downtown area, and a police car where you don't instantly recognize the agency(turns out it's the Surete du Quebec[or was it?])...

Just thought you should know, but just in case, can this be verified so I don't get accused of being STUPID?...thanks,Baldwin91006 02:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speaker of trailers

Do you know who’s the speaker of the trailers? I didn’t find any information here. Thanks! --88.68.199.204 (talk) 21:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [1]. Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia. --Maniwar (talk) 01:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thursdays from 8-9

Currently the article says that on Thursdays, from 8PM-9PM, episodes of Ugly Betty are aired. However, due to the strike, for the last few weeks and for the next several weeks indefinitely, Lost episodes have been aired in that timeslot (the previous week's episode) followed by a new episode from 9PM-10PM. Should this be changed? ShadowUltra (talk) 18:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Probably. Do you mind if I delete this section because it is really only a one-time question? -- bmitchelf•T•F 19:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Time zone

Prime time:

"All times are Eastern and Pacific (subtract one hour for Central and Mountain time)."

I am not American nor English-speaker and there's one time zone in my country. Can someone explain me how can a given time (for instance 8pm) can be at the same time in 2 time zones (ET/PT) ? Actually I don't understand when a network says one program is going to be at 8pm ET/PT... If one can explain to me ? It looks there's no article about that ! Thanks. 82.240.207.81 (talk) 21:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

It means that the same show is played at that certain time in each time zone, so something that is on at 8:00 in ET and PT will be played three hours later in PT, when it turns to 8:00, since it is three hours behind ET. -- bmitchelf•T•F 22:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
I better understand why some times are given with only one time zone, for live shows... ("Academy Awards at 7pm ET"). But what about shows with a "c" added at the end ? On NBC.com, I can see that "Quarterlife will premiere tomorrow at 10/9c." What it means ? In fact, I think Wikipedia needs an article among its 2-million, about The way time zones are written for general comprehension in the media of countries with multiple time zones, especially USA... because there are much more stupid things than that on it! Thanks. 82.240.207.81 (talk) 01:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh no you didn't! That Manning pass to Tyree was excellent and exciting! Anyway, this is probably a topic that should be broght up somewhere else if you want that article made, but I will answer your question. When it says 10/9c, the first number responds to the airing in the more populous Eastern and Pacific time zones and second number with the "c" refers to when it will air in the Central and Mountain time zones, or the middle of the country. -- bmitchelf•T•F 16:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
True that thit Superbowl moment was breathtaking, but I wouldn't create an article for that, there are many great TV/sports moments that happenned before the "WP reflex". Thanks for your answer, I couldn't guess ! 82.240.207.81 (talk) 21:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] E

We are all hackers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.241.118.139 (talk) 15:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)