Talk:TV Guide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Comment

Guys, what's with the sudden explosion of 50+ subtopics in this article? Vesta 05:37, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It's gone. RickK 05:43, Jun 19, 2004 (UTC)

No, it's not. TheCustomOfLife 17:54, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

If I'd caught this today, I would have blocked the user because they've been warned, but since it was done yesterday when I was almost completely unable to get into Wikipedia, I won't worry about it. If they come back and do it again, I will block them. RickK 20:00, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)

The cartoon character guy is back. Mike H 23:00, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)

The Prevue Channel Wiki in this article redirects to another TV Guide channel page rather than one describing the Prevue Channel at the verry least it should be a stub telling you what it once was.

[edit] New TV Guide

If I remember correctly, the new TV Guide will start with the October 17 listings, meaning that it will actually hit the shelves as much as a week earlier, on October 10. Mike H (Talking is hot) 23:55, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Source

Does anyone know where TV Guide gets its information from? Is it sent to them from the broadcasting companies? Because a lot of tv shows listings they have I cannot find any place else. Also, would TV guide be credible enough to use as a legitimate source? ArgentiumOutlaw 01:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

For TV show times or networks/channels it should work - they're virtually always correct. And I think that they get their information directly from the networks.

[edit] Still wondering... (or: a non-US/CA perspective?)

The article doesn't make clear whether (which I suspect) TV Guide is the only publication of TV listings. I'm wondering, since here in Germany, we have a number of (national (for what that's worth ;) )) TV program publications.

So, is it, or is it not, a monopoly? --jae 17:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I've lived here my whole life, and I've never seen or heard of a different publication that shows tv listings on a regular basis. I wouldnt call it a monopoly tho, TV guide was the first to do it and they dont seem to abuse their standing as the only source of tv listings in my opinion. ArgentiumOutlaw 01:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Saturday-Friday always until 2005?

"The magazine also changed format to start the week's issue with Sunday listings, rather than Saturday listings, changing a tradition that started from the magazine's first issue."

Not so sure that's true. Certainly, they started with Saturday by the late 1960s, and probably much earlier than that. But the first few issues in the 1950s definitely were Friday-Thursday - the cover with Desi Arnaz Jr. is dated Apr 3-9, 1953. April 3, 1953, was a Friday. At some point, they must have done an eight-day issue (Friday to Friday) to change over to a Saturday-Friday period.

It should also be noted that, at least into the 1970s, the listings began a broadcast day between 4 and 5 a.m. Originally, there were no 24-hour television sources, so TV Guide listings for a day started with the earliest program scheduled on any station, and ended with the last program before sign-off. Sometimes, the listings might stretch past 3 a.m. into the next day; the first morning listings might be earlier than 5 am, but only rarely. This in an era when the only channels viewers had were local and nearby over-the-air stations, or cable channels of the same and slightly further away. There were no satellite stations, and rarely any stations more than 250 miles away.

The advent of 24-hour programs on other than "wheel-format" (e.g. CNN, Weather Channel) info channels would have triggered the need to come up with 24-hour listings, and therefore a rigid cut-off time, which ended up as 5 a.m.

Historically, too, TV Guide did not list consecutive movies separately. They would show:

(channel number) MOVIE - Double (or Triple) Feature

then underneath, starting with "(1)", list the movie titles and description. Early in the 1970s, they simply listed the second (and third) features at their respective scheduled start times (in increments of 5 minutes).

GBC 20:06, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TV Guide first issue.jpg

Image:TV Guide first issue.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 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 04:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed split of article

This article has two topics, each of which should have their own article. If no one objects, they may be split into two articles. Any support or objection? -- Jreferee 15:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed unsupported opinion and material of little interest

I removed things like "It no longer filled a need and struggled to justify its existence." I believe that added little to the previous sentence, which noted an 85% circulation fall. I moved the international TV Guides to the top, to remove a U.S. Canadian bias. I noted teh term is in common usage, and supported that by adding examples of such usage going back to 1995. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveBurstein (talk • contribs) 18:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)