Talk:Itv.com

Weather & ITV Shop[edit]

Please note that at the moment their is no longer a Weather or Shop on itv.com, however in the future they may be added again, but at the moment their is not. This is Drew 17:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At www.itv.com/weather, it clearly states the site will be up and running soon, and there is an ITV Shop: www.itvsuperstore.com, but www.itv.com/shop doesn't redirect to it at the moment.
GMc^talk 20:52, 04 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TV Guide[edit]

I notice my inclusion of the new ITV TV Guide was revetred. I put it here because ITV is a television provider and thus it feels entirely appropriate, SqueakBox 20:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting ref'd material[edit]

Please justify your reversion of ref'd & notable material here or it will be reverted. An edit summary directing me to my talk page is insufficient. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 17:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You work for TVGenius, so please stop sprinkling Wikipedia with name-drops to the organization. That is editing with a promotional bent. Them From Space 07:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:ITVonline2.png Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:ITVonline2.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:48, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge[edit]

ITV Mobile was proposed for deletion, but I have changed that to prose a merge into this article. Although the PROD had as part of its reason "reads like an advert", to me it reads fairly neutrally, though it could be better sourced, especially its history. Si Trew (talk) 18:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC) Done[reply]