Talk:Deadline Hollywood/Archive 1

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Deadline.com. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100115225305/http://www.mediabistro.com:80/fishbowlny/revolving_door/nikki_fine_hires_variety_vet_to_helm_deadline_new_york_148471.asp to http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/revolving_door/nikki_fine_hires_variety_vet_to_helm_deadline_new_york_148471.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Article not moved, no consensus  GB fan  10:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Deadline.com → Deadline (website) — The website brands itself simply as "Deadline", not "Deadline.com". The Celestial City (talk) 18:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose. We go by what people call them, not by what they choose to call themselves. Andrewa (talk) 23:20, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


 * To my knowledge, very few people call it "Deadline.com". From my experience, it's usually known as "Deadline Holywood". The Celestial City (talk) 23:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

It would be good to have some evidence other than your personal experience. Andrewa (talk) 03:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, the official Facebook page for starters. What are your sources for claiming Deadline is known as Deadline.com? The Celestial City (talk) 12:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No sources needed so far. If someone said to me deadline.com I'd know exactly what they meant, and if I said deadline.com to a complete stranger I'd expect them to know too, so the current name is quite adequate. A case needs to be made for the proposed move in terms of WP:NC. Or is Deadline Hollywood a better name still? Andrewa (talk) 19:54, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Second requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 12:00, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Deadline.com → Deadline Hollywood – Name used for official branding (see also here and here). I'd say common name, but a search engine test with Google returns slightly more with "deadline.com" than with "Deadline Hollywood" (probably because of the domain). --Relisted. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:22, 9 August 2014 (UTC) 23W  02:37, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose: The current name is, as you pointed out, the common name. If you said "Deadline Hollywood" I don't think many people would know what you were talking about. KaneZolanski (talk) 17:43, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I only stated that because it would return results from the domain itself. In prose, it appears as "Deadline Hollywood" more commonly than "Deadline.com". I guess a better test would be to check and  (with the site itself removed). 23W  17:44, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 5 February 2018

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: move the page to Deadline Hollywood for the time being, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 17:54, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Deadline.com → Deadline Hollywood – Actual proper name of the publication; deadline.com is just the domain name. They've been consistently branded Deadline Hollywood for years, and even the former name was a partial match, Deadline Hollywood Daily. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:30, 5 February 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. –Ammarpad (talk) 16:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Neutral. Actually, if you access the mobile version of the site (or just squeeze your browser) you'll see "Hollywood" in the heading disappear. Simply "Deadline" is also the name that's on the parent company's site. The site used to be divided into branches "Hollywood", "New York", "London", and "Paris", although "Hollywood" was indeed the one that would show up when accessing http://www.deadline.com/ . ("Hollywood" was run by Finke and "New York" was run by Fleming, but since Finke has left and Fleming now oversees the entire site, that division was rendered redundant, I suspect.) So, presumably, the brand "Deadline Hollywood" is just a remainder of an old subsite, and the site (domain) as a whole is just in the middle of being renovated and rebranded as Deadline by PMC, although "Deadline Hollywood" may still remain as the name of a (main) branch. That would explain the ugliness of the full PC version and the sleek modern design of the mobile version, considering responsive design is something rather new. So I would favor either no move or a move to Deadline (website), Deadline (blog), or what have you, over Deadline Hollywood, which was at some point, if not still is, one mere component of the subject of this article. Nardog (talk) 17:41, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support "Deadline (website)" Deadline Hollywood, per Nardog reasoning below. Since nobody has posted here since the 5th to counter Nardog's analysis or factual information, there doesn't seem to be an objection to 'Deadline (website)', so how about we go with that one (edit after reading the comments below edited 02:43 on February 13). Randy Kryn (talk) 00:52, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support The website's About page makes clear use of "Deadline Hollywood" as their WP:OFFICIAL name. It also works well as WP:NATURALDISAMBIG. -- Netoholic @  01:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that page and WP:NATURALDISAMBIG make a compelling argument. I guess I'm fine with either and a move to Deadline (xxx) could wait till they drop "Hollywood" in their banner completely. Nardog (talk) 02:17, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Withdrawn RfC
Now that the article name is no longer a domain name (Deadline.com),Deadline Hollywood should be italicized, as with other periodicals. MOS:ITALICTITLE says, in part: "Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized (Salon or HuffPost)." This has already been implemented for other sites like The A.V. Club, Daytime Confidential, and Digital Spy. It was noted in the comments above that Deadline.com's About page does not italicize the title; well, neither does the Salon About page, or HuffPost self-references in articles or its About page. Anyway, the specific stylization which may be used by website themselves does not necessarily impact our own MOS, which is based on our internal consensus.— TAnthonyTalk 19:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * What is the basis for believing that a website that has a domain-name appearance should not be italicized? It seems to me that we should have had Deadline.com before this (and of course now with Deadline Hollywood). Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 19:48, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * That idea is a takeaway I've never forgotten from the discussions a couple of years ago debating the default italicization of website in citation templates. The argument then seems to have been that a domain name is not the same as a title. However, in a cursory check of related MOS pages I haven't yet found anything regarding whether we should or shouldn't italicize domain names.— TAnthonyTalk 21:53, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I sort of get the sentiment that it may look weird, but I don't think there's anything saying that it should not be italicized. A quick look at Google Books shows the book Panel to the Screen italicizing the domain-appearance name as seen here. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 22:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Invalid RfC
RfCs are required to be written in neutral language. This RfC is written as pure advocacy. Please read the directions at WP:RfC "Statement should be neutral and brief", remove this, and start again properly. The only way to a fair and proper RfC is to follow the procedures, which are there for a reason. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)