Talk:Crave (TV network)

Untitled
Merged from First Choice (pay-tv) page that I created weekend of 2006-07-01, as recommended by User:stickguy. What do I do with the original First Choice article? --Jimj wpg 03:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Completed merge of First Choice (pay-tv) with this page (The Movie Network), as per advice from Uer:stickyguy. --Jimj wpg 14:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

MHD pic
I recently read this article and I found that the MHD logo was gone from the page and has apparently been deleted, so I added this new logo, which is not a good quality logo but it's the best I could find. Could somoene find the logo that was there originally and post it back or could someone fix the logo that is there?

Fair use rationale for Image:Mfest.jpg
Image:Mfest.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 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 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 02:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MMore HD.jpg
Image:MMore HD.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 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 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 08:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Firstchoice 1983logo.jpg
Image:Firstchoice 1983logo.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 Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup
This article needed a significant amount of cleanup in terms of both nonfree image overuse and spam/ad copy (much of which was intertwined). I would encourage all editors to reference our neutral point of view and nonfree image requirements for any clarification. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Two logos re-added. HBO Canada is appropriate for current identification.  1st Choice is appropriate to show the Network's original public branding, so adding to understanding; and for recognition.


 * See also Mike Godwin's recent comments on historic TV station logos, and recent discussion at WT:NFC. Jheald (talk) 11:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Once more: Mike Godwin's comments have no relevance here. Mike stated that it is not against the law for us to use these images. That is not in dispute, and even if it were, his say would be final on that matter only. Mike said absolutely nothing about whether the images are or are not acceptable by our nonfree content policies, and even if he did offer his opinion there, that is not a matter in which he has the final word or any greater say than any other editor. I'm more than willing to engage in discussion as to whether these images pass those policies (particularly #1, in that logos are generally used for "identification" and a current logo replaces historical one for that purpose, and #8, in what significant way old logos enhance a reader's understanding of what The Movie Network is and does), but what Mike had to say is of absolutely zero relevance. We decline to use nonfree images that we legally could all the time, not because it violates the law, but because it violates our nonfree content policies and thus our mission as a free content project. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * We allow logos for recognition/identification; and as a significant characteristic of the entities we are describing. On both grounds, recognition/identification and as a significant characteristic, the logos for HBO Canada and for First Choice pay-tv should stay.  These are grounds recognised to be appropriate under NFCC #8; and, given that conclusion, the use is no more than needed to convey the information (NFCC #3).


 * There is ample precedent to support this, for example in relation to similar questions regarding old football logos earlier this year.


 * As to Mike's comments, I can't agree with you. As I wrote at AN/I:
 * Let's be clear here. WP's policy is narrower than US fair use, in two precise, quite limited ways. First, because we ask not whether we ourselves could use the image, but whether a commercial downstream reuser using our content verbatim would be okay. Secondly, because we don't accept non-free content, even with permissions, if it could potentially be replaced by free content. Those are the parameters WP:NFC was crafted to defend.
 * These images aren't replaceable. So if Mike says these images are okay fair-use - which I would understand to mean okay for downstream verbatim reusers, then we should pay some attention to that.


 * WP:NFC is closely patterned on US Fair Use law. The restrictions match very closely those that are needed to be comfortable that a verbatim US commercial reuser would be legal.  If it were otherwise - if we were trying to conform to the old UK Copyright Act 1956 for example - the restrictions would be quite different.


 * The restrictions of WP:NFC are not arbitrary. The line we draw isn't just pulled out of the air.  There is a consistent rationale for why we allow some things and not others, and it is the question: could a US commercial reuser use this unchanged?  A line in the sand like that is needed when questions of interpretation of WP:NFC arise, and it makes Mike's comments very relevant.  Jheald (talk) 14:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

monopoly vs. duopoly
The Movie Network vs. Movie Central is not a duopoly. In economics, a duopoly is the direct competition of two comparable enterprises against each other (and no others). Under these conditions, there is little incentive for one to do anything beyond match basically what the other is offering - any attempt to further undercut pricing brings down the market price as a whole, so normally does not happen. The Movie Network and Movie Central are a pair of regional monopolies; because they divided the country geographically between themselves (The Movie Network going east while Movie Central is Manitoba westward) they compete with no one - not even each other - as premium cable movie services. They charge whatever the market (or governmental regulators) will bear. Instead of just one direct competitor, there is no direct competitor... a key factual distinction. Any re-insertion of text describing this arrangement as "duopoly" is factually wrong and should be fixed. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 02:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems that you are forgetting about Super Channel. Emarsee (Talk • Contribs) 04:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Au contraire, Movie Central is what replaced Super Channel after it went west-only - at least if you mean the original Canadian pay-TV channel of that name. The two originally competed directly at inception (February 1983), along with a third part-time C Channel that was soon defunct. The two surviving channels then divided the country into two regional monopolies. They justified this at the time by claiming weak demand for the programming (at least at the rates then being charged for one channel) and by claiming that videocassette rentals remained as their competitor. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 06:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Kids Suite
Was reading http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/188-bell-fibe-tv/252833-fibe-tv-programming-packages-pricing-discussion.html#post2686649 and 16 jan 2016 post says "Kids Suite used to be part of the TMN Movies package.". Does anyone happen to know what year that was? I would like to check TMN site archives to see if it was mentioned. ScratchMarshall (talk) 20:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 18 October 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved  (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:04, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Crave (TV network) → Crave (TV channel) – Speedy: Not a network by definition Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:01, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Why is it not a network? -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * See WP:NCBC. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a network to me. With "Crave 1", etc. being the channels. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose - WP:NCBC describes a network as "content providers for programming" and WP:NCBC as "an individual content stream provided by one managing network brand". Clearly, this article is about the overriding network because it includes a section Crave (TV network) documenting its individual streams of content. -- Netoholic @ 15:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)