Template talk:Infobox broadcasting network

Syntax
I just took out all the values from the code and put them in a list for easy reference:

Syntax
For easy copying and pasting TorontoStorm 14:47, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Esoteric
This is esoteric, as it can now handle the additional duties of a single television station, usually via the Infobox Television Station redirect. I didn't do it, but it was done. -- WC  Quidditch  &#9742;   &#9998;  22:25, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Syntax
For easy copying and pasting Ronald20 19:20, January 22, 2006 (UTC)
 * NOTE: This refers to usage for a TV station (eg, using call letters like WXYZ), which was recently depreciated.  DO NOT USE THE ABOVE.  Infobox Broadcast is correct template.  This template was meant for networks (such as ABC).  -- WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  20:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikification
I went through and dewikified some of the terms in the infobox. For example, Key People gave links to both Key and People. Neither of those links would have been of any use. I left in links which are useful, and when in doubt left it as it was. DynaBlast 10:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Use for television stations
I strongly disagree with the comment that this can be used for individual television stations. There is an accepted standard for television stations Template:Infobox_Broadcast. I am going to remove the text from the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reflex Reaction (talk • contribs) 20:37, February 15, 2006
 * I think that once all stations are switched back to that, I will change Infobox Television Station (the now-depreciated redirect to this) into a redirect to Infobox Broadcast. -- WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  23:57, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry for taking so long to get back. I appreciate your changes on the page and working on freeing up Infobox Television Station. I will begin working on changing the infoboxes and making sure templates are not screwed up.  --Reflex Reaction (talk)&bull; 19:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Infobox Television Station is completely freed up, and listed on RfD. This does 'not' necessarily mean it will be deleted, if you oppose that for whatever reason. Morgan Wick 03:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The RfD was kept. Feel free to change the redirect. Morgan Wick 04:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe it was kept to maintain histories... so it's going to be left alone. -- WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  22:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

What happened to past_names?
Can anyone explain to me why the past_names field was removed? Daduzi 17:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Added field
I forgot to note this in the editing of the code, but with the closure of The WB and UPN networks, I added the closure_date field to the infobox. Thus folks don't need to try to shoehorn the info in the launch date field... — SterlingNorth 08:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

can someone add a field for me, or tell me how to do it
I was looking at articles about international TV networks like the ABC TV and BBC one. I noticed that the have information like this:

Picture format=576i (PAL) 16:9 Picture format=576i (SDTV),720p (HDTV)

and I wanted to add this kind of information to American TV networks like ABC, ION Life, etc... I copied the above line, pasted it into the infobox on the article, but it didn't show up. I read on this page that someone added closure_date to the infobox. I clicked edit on the template and I saw a lot of programming code and had no Idea what it did. I'm relatively new to wikipedia, and my editing experience is mostly copying and paste from other similar articles and changing the fields. I don't know any programming languages. So can someone add the field picture format from infobox TV channel to this infobox for me, or tell me how to do this. — joeloliv8  19 august 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal, August 2008
I am here to suggest a merger of Infobox TV channel, Infobox Radio station, Infobox Broadcast and Infobox Broadcasting network. Their functions are mostly overlapped, despite their own aims. Especially, Infobox Radio station and Infobox Broadcast. Also, I saw the article NHK uses Infobox TV channel where Infobox Broadcasting network supposed to place.

By the way, after the merges, features like Background parameter of Infobox musical artist would be useful. -- JSH-alive (talk)(cntrbtns)(mail me) 14:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You're gonna have to post this notification across the associated WikiProjects if it has any hope of finding adequate consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 16:21, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Bad, bad idea merging Infobox Radio station and Infobox Broadcast together. They are two different infoboxes for two different media (one radio, one television).


 * On the other hand, merging Infobox TV channel and Infobox Broadcasting network since they have, essentially, the same information in both. That one is a good idea.


 * Support Merge of Infobox TV channel and Infobox Broadcasting network.
 * Strongly Oppose merging of Infobox Radio station and Infobox Broadcast. - NeutralHomer  •  Talk  21:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strongly Oppose all merges. Different media, different specifications, and especially different fields that do nothing in another medium. Yes, they overlap, but they're all customized to their own fields.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strongly Oppose all. One box for all 4 platforms would too confusing to figure/fill out, there would be too many empty fields to add to the confusion. We have separate radio and television station projects, so why would we merge the boxes? If we merge the boxes, we might as well (re)merge TVS and WPRS. A television network is not a television station is not a cable tv network is not a radio station. User:MrMarkTaylor What's that?/What I Do/Feed My Box 01:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strongly Oppose all -- the use of a "one size fits all" infobox is confusing, as well as being prone to errors. Radio and television have attributes that are unique to each other, and merging them together would be a big mistake. -- azumanga (talk) 16:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment please show us what the new infobox would look like and what parameters it would have, and how certain items would be affected. LA (T) @ 01:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like Infobox TV channel, basics like names, callsign (if have), logo, owner, shares, broadcast area, websites and availability and specifics for TV, radio, network and broadcasting company, and for the articles about broadcasting companies, networks, radio stations and TV (stations and channels). -- JSH-alive (talk)(cntrbtns)(mail me) 03:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Per the above request, I am working on a combined template to try and address concerns that others and myself have. One important note is that this is designed to be implemented after the 2009 analog switch-off in America because it gets rid of all the analog stuff.  It is in progress and I will get a link up once it is nearer to completion ... just wanted to let you guys know about it though.  Krocheck (talk) 10:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

As promised I have worked my butt of this last day preparing a box that can serve what is currently 4 different, but common boxes. My box is located at User:Krocheck/sandbox2. Examples of Template:Infobox Broadcast, Template:Infobox TV channel, Template:Infobox Radio station, and Template:Infobox Broadcasting network can be found at User:Krocheck/sandbox3, User:Krocheck/sandbox4, User:Krocheck/sandbox5, andUser:Krocheck/sandbox6, respectively. Documentation on the box is incomplete at the moment. Because of its various uses, rubric-like examples will need to be make up for each of the old templates so people don't get confused. There are some things that are new to the box that are very handy. I have some examples I'm putting together at User:Krocheck/sandbox1 of different ways this new box could be used to display similar data. Please provide me with some feedback on this and whether or not this is a direction you all think would work. Please note that I have made translator templates that could be implemented immediately to switch all 4 of these templates to the unified look. Also, things like the colors could be changed based on some background parameters for broadcast, channel, network and audio, video. Krocheck (talk) 06:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it looks good. Powergate92   Talk  20:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Where do we go from here? There's still work that needs to be done on these for sure and I want to get more input on this.  Certainly I cannot be the one to just implement this ... I'd be slaughtered :) Krocheck (talk) 06:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Good work! But I think
 * Your working title, "Infobox digital media", seems not proper. Because, not every broadcaster in the world operates in digital.
 * The demo infobox has a number of parameters for 8 additional channels now. But, what about Sky Sports operating 8 channels, Sky Movies 15 channels, Doordarshan 19 channels and Zee Network 26 channels?
 * How about something like General VG character subboxes working on Infobox VG character?
 * -- JSH-alive (talk)(cntrbtns)(mail me) 11:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks you for your feedback.
 * The working title is a working title, so it does not matter to me what the thing is called. I was trying to capture something all-encompassing for the targets, but also to be able to include any notable internet tv and radio stations in the mix.  Television media is close to what I'm going for, but obviously doesn't include radio, and simply Media won't fly because of print.  My intention was to stay away from station, channel, and network since this one does them all.
 * The multiple channels are designed for broadcasters with digital subchannels only ... network and sat/cable providers like you mentioned have far too many channels and would clutter up the box. 8 is a bit excessive ... I was noticing that some broadcasters have 5 total channels and my original design had 4, so I bumped it up to include those.  A table in the article is better suited and I also have the idea to make standard table templates to use for transmitters, repeaters, and channels/subchannels, but that is a different project
 * The thought occurred to me to use sub-boxes, but there's a reason I did not. Me finishing the documentation would help here.  The box is setup with a parameter called "_force_channels" which can be set to true or left blank (usually left blank).  When true, all the chan_N_* parameters are forced into the Channels area.  If, however, that is off, only the parameters that have values for 2+ channels are shown in the channels area, if only 1 then it is display in the top/main area.  The flexibility of being able to specify 1 brand and have it displayed in the top/main area or specify 3 brands and display them with the individual channels was what I was going for and therefore doesn't let me use sub-boxes.  Some of my examples here highlight the flexibility.
 * Thanks, Krocheck (talk) 15:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krocheck (talk • contribs)

How about a new feature? An external link parameter for the license if is available on the web.--JSH-alive (talk)(cntrbtns)(mail me) 07:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not opposed to that. If we can get rid of all the transmitter stuff except for coords and a link to the FCC I'd prefer that as well. Krocheck (talk) 07:42, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Don't assume that AMQ or TVQ will have direct equivalents for non-US stations. The Canadian spectrumdirect.ic.gc.ca is searchable but there's no way to pass a callsign as part of a URL; the Mexican cofetel.gob.mx is more likely just to provide one huge .pdf file of "infrastructura" listing all eight hundred TV transmitters (with no indication as to which are merely repeaters, or which station they're rebroadcasting). No idea offhand what to expect from Ofcom or other national broadcast spectrum regulators, but odds are that depending on country this will be hit-and-miss. SpectrumDirect is annoying enough to use that most of our pages seem to ignore it and use third-party RECnet to retrieve Canadian data. The Mexican articles don't bother linking COFETEL, although the "infrastructura" list data appears in some form as list of television stations in Mexico and therefore is given attribution there. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 20:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And what about the British Ofcom? -- JSH-alive talk • cont • mail 01:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Krocheck, you gave up? -- JSH-alive talk • cont • mail 06:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC) UPDATE I have begun the process of re-evaluating this based on the feedback above. Ultimately there is no way to create a 'catch all' infobox because of the various differences between broadcast, television, and audio-based media. There's a lot of information that varies. Hense the re-evaluation. I can make this work, but it is going to require a bit of a change in thought and methology. What I'm looking to do is create a simple base template and for those organizations that have things like subchannels, multiple transmitters/repeaters, and other forms of 'excessive information' will have to be moved to tables or sections in the content. I think one of the problems with these boxes is this notion that a ton of information needs to be squeezed in there (e.g. multiple transmitter information, subchannels). They're meant to be an overview and the article is meant to cover the details. It would require a lot of revisiting the current articles and potentially tweaking the box as new scenarios arise. I expect simple broadcast stations (single channel, single transmitter) will not see a change, but the others will. I will be back with a new template and hopefully a couple full sample pages of current stations/networks, etc. to show off my vision. I expect to call it Template:Infobox_Audio_visual_media Krocheck (talk) 18:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope ... ran out of free time. Hope to pick it back up soon. Krocheck (talk) 03:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Why not Infobox Broadcaster? Its generic, and they all broadcast. ViperSnake151 17:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Because that name excludes entities like cable channels, internet radio, sat radio etc. that this box is supposed to cater to as well. Legally in the UK broadcasting refers to wireless transmission a/v and data.  If someone can come up with a clever name that can encompass everything, I'm all ears. Krocheck (talk) 18:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge Proposal - Solution Presentation
I have been working on and off for some time now to create an infobox template that will cover the needs of the four boxes proposed in the merger. The requirements gathering process was probably the hardest part, but what I've settled on is a template that uses a system of sub-templates in order to meet the requirements of the ever changing a/v media landscape. This is very different from the solution I worked on earlier (see above).

The box I have come up with is located: User:Krocheck/sandbox2. I am in the process of writing detailed instructions on usage but for now a parameter dump is documented there. Two background parameters are used to define the colors the template displays for the head and subhead rows. _type (video, audio) and _scope (broadcast, channel, network). These two parameters are also used to define content aware titles and links. E.g. channel format for video links to Picture format but for audio links to Radio format.

I have placed examples of each of the four merge templates to show my implementation strategy at: User:Krocheck/sandbox3, User:Krocheck/sandbox4, User:Krocheck/sandbox5, User:Krocheck/sandbox6. I have also made numerous examples available at: User:Krocheck/sandbox1. If you would like me to make more for your favorite station/channel/network, I'd be happy to do so. Please let me know your thoughts. I asked a bunch of people in my office to look at the side-by-side comparisons and they all picked the new template saying it was cleaner and the information was better organized. Krocheck (talk) 11:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This is an incredibly intricate and deeply flawed solution to a problem that, at least for radio stations, just does not exist. What exactly is wrong with the many thousands of terrestrial broadcast radio station articles using an infobox tailored for them?  Given the strong consensus against any such merger, what am I missing here?  - Dravecky (talk) 06:15, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Considering it's been almost a month and a half with limited feedback I wasn't too concerned. Bit of a time suck, but oh well, that life.  The reason I worked on this was simply because, while different, most of these media outlets have very similar needs.  I could go back and check, but I seem to recall more than half of all fields in each box had a identical or equivalent fields in at least 2 of the other boxes.  By equivalent I simply mean a field that can be called the same thing for the input, but have a different text label or link based on the type of media (picture format vs. radio format ... both format).  The box actually handles small discrepancies like that if you check the code.


 * Personally, I don't like Infobox Broadcast and Infobox Radio station. They are poorly organized and don't properly address today's needs regarding subchannels/HD radio.  So if I simplified the box, basically made a radio variant that stripped out the stuff that doesn't apply, would that work?  Did you look at User:Krocheck/sandbox5?  Every person I had look at them side-by-side said the newer look was easier to understand.  The headings make a big difference. Krocheck (talk) 07:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Country parameter
Hi. I would like to note that the country parameter should not be required but optional instead, as this wouldn't produce somewhat nonsensical rendering like in Eurovision (network) where entry for country is visible but it shouldn't be in this case, I think. Best regards, --biblbroks (talk) 00:41, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Anyone have any idea what the parameters mean?
There are no docs for this template and there are a number of confusing parameters. Type? Branding? It would be helpful to get docs. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Add budget, employees
Adding  would make sense (broadcast networks are a subset of Template:Infobox_company). --Webmgr (talk) 15:50, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Clarifications/updates needed?
Going over this template, I noticed that a few parameters seem to be depreciated or no longer active - CEO and test card, for example, no longer produce results. Going over one page (CBS), I noticed it listed revenues, etc. and it still worked but it's no longer on the template itself. Should a change be made across the board for all pages to remove/update depreciated content? Also, it might be helpful to give a description of the fields in the template at the bottom. For example, just putting "servicename" doesn't really help me know what that means. I appreciate the time and any feedback... have a great day! FriarTuck1981 (talk) 09:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed split into new templates
Should this template be split? Sammi Brie (t • c) 21:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Explanation
This template, with more than 1,400 transclusions, has typically had a high rate of unknown parameter use (earlier this year it was at more than 10 percent of all transclusions), suggesting unmet needs. Its purpose is unclear and partially duplicative of other templates. Worse, the redirect name Infobox network has led to uses that are not related to broadcasting topics.

I'm proposing to split this template into three (two new templates and a merger with a third):


 * Infobox broadcasting organization, covering broadcasting companies and organizations, particularly those that have radio and television services. Examples of articles that would use this template: Jordan Radio and Television Corporation, UA:PBC.
 * Infobox radio network, for radio networks. Examples: K-Love, NHK Radio 1.
 * Infobox television channel (existing), for television networks, with any relevant parameters not already present in that template incorporated there. Examples: ITV Westcountry, C/S. (I plan to have this renamed to Infobox television network after this RfC concludes.)

There are also a number of news agencies using this template, such as Iran Book News Agency and Bernama. These might be worth spinning off into Infobox company or Infobox organization as they rarely use any parameters specific to this template. Some select articles on one sole radio or TV station might be better suited for the single-station Infobox radio station and Infobox broadcast.

My hope is that more tightly defined templates are able to meet the parameter needs of a wider set of articles, while combining the television network and television channel templates. This will reduce confusion about which of the various "television service" templates is applicable to a particular article.

Discussion

 * Why is Infobox broadcasting organization needed? Why can't it use Infobox company or Infobox organization? --Gonnym (talk) 21:57, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm trying to determine if the organizations use parameters that are specific to that template. Sammi Brie (t • c) 00:04, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * suggesting unmet needs, well, if there's unmet needs you go to the talk page and make a request. You don't just use a parameter name that doesn't exist. imo it just suggests poor usage and bad maintenance for improper usages to not be fixed. Regardless, what are some examples of parameter names that would be separate between these 2 new proposed templates (that one will have, and the other won't)? Your nom doesn't have any examples. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:48, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Let me respond to your comments now, sorry for the delay (I was managing the rollout of the other new radio/TV overhauls)...
 * There are four to six parameters that seem to be needed to transition a number of the organizations. This is particularly true for the transclusions of the former Infobox BBC nation or region, merged here in early 2015. They are tvstations, tvtransmitters, radiostations and radiotransmitters, and potentially nation and regions which may be mergeable into other parameters of Infobox organization. I'd like to be able to do this as an embed, but Infobox organization does not support that yet, so I've asked how to add it.
 * I went and reviewed the list I had of unknown or malformed parameters and really found only one that was wanting for the radio network articles: format. A good number of the others were either valid in other, similar templates (see below) or duplicated parameters that existed under other names. I've created User:Sammi Brie/Infobox radio network which takes a relevant subset of parameters and is formatted in a similar style to the radio and television station revamp templates.
 * Many of the other malformed parameters are valid in Infobox television channel, which confirms my hunch of merging many transclusions there. It looks like the parameters type, tvstations and tvtransmitters from here need equivalents, as does the dual-image capacity. That template has some other issues: its unknown parameter rate is an eye-popping 48 percent, so there may very well be more discussion to be had there.
 * As transitions to both Infobox organization and Infobox television channel require parameter renames, it would probably work out well that the transclusions could be converted to a wrapper template, and then a bot could convert them to the desired final template with new parameter names.
 * Hopefully this addresses your concerns. Sammi Brie (t • c) 05:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Duplicate parameters?
Hi, what is the difference between "Digital channel(s)" and "Virtual channel(s)"? The description for both is "List of digital channels the network owns." If these are duplicates, would it be possible to merge these? If yes, my vote would be to keep "Digital channel(s)", because "digital" feels more accurate/intuitive than "virtual". Thank you! Agnes Oshiro (talk) 23:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * @AgnesOshiro I think that came from the need for this to handle networks of individual TV stations. I see you're working on OPB and would recommend, frankly, that neither parameter be filled out in that article. Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 07:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you @Sammi Brie! Specific to OPB's infobox, I didn't think "see § Television stations" was particularly informative/helpful so removing it sounds great. I'm working on improving the article (and subsequently, the infobox) so I'll be checking in from time to time to make sure that I'm properly utilizing the Broadcasting Network template. Agnes Oshiro (talk) 18:45, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @AgnesOshiro In most cases, I'd use another infobox, but I'm trying to figure out the right path forward for the main infobox in articles on radio and television broadcasting organizations, which are the ones that use this article the most (vs. Infobox television channel or Infobox radio station). Sammi Brie  (she/her • t • c) 18:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)