Talk:Discovery Channel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discovery Channel was the Article Creation and Improvement Drive for the week spanning from Sunday, 23 October 2005. For more details, see the Article Creation and Improvement Drive history.

Travel and Adventure missing in the list of channels!

Travel and Adventure is not one of their US channels. Mhking 03:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Edits made by Discovery Communications IP address 2 AIP 3 censored and spam 4 Idea 5 official name? 6 Brought to you by... 7 Taglines 8 Retail outlets 9 Criticism 10 SILENCE!

[edit] Edits made by Discovery Communications IP address

Just a heads up that this article has been edited by an IP address belonging to Discovery Communications, the company that owns the Discovery Channel. The IP address is: 198.147.10.56. Here's the geolocation info: http://dnsstuff.com/tools/ipall.ch?ip=198.147.10.56 . Note this change in the article's history: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discovery_Channel&diff=next&oldid=97844967. The edits are pro-Discovery in tone, and, specifically, the reference to guerrilla marketing has been removed.

This may be related to a recent negative article written about Discovery's guerilla marketing tactics: http://spankmymarketer.com/the-learning-channel.html. The pro-Discovery changes were made shortly after the publication of the negative article.--72.174.188.178 17:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AIP

Soo... this is my first AIP. I'm looking at this article and thinking that the lead section is too long. What else needs to be fixed this week? Jacqui ^{★ 03:11, 31 October 2005 (UTC)}

• My first also. I feel that the the Censored and Diversity sections have no meaning to the article. They aren't really takling about Discovery Channel, rather about productions done by the Discovery Channel. RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 03:17, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Perhaps they could be worked into some sort of more generic section on programming created about current events? The Discovery Channel does do a good deal of those, but I don't know why the individual one on this page deserves its own attention. Jacqui ^{★ 03:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)}

I agree. As part of a long article they might fit but now it's like a set of monster truck tires on a beetle: they don;t fit and you can't get anywhere as long as they're there. Coll7 06:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

By the way, regarding the Censored section, I checked who contributed that and also what other things they had contrubuted, and they had mostly spammed other entries with the same paragraph (or similar). I'm going to take that one out now. If anyone comes by later who disagrees with the three of us so far, revert me and we'll talk more here. (Also, if we want to mention it in passing at some later point, we have the edit history to get it back) Jacqui ^{★ 07:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)}

Can we remove the redirect of Discovery Health Channel back to this page? DHC is its own network and I'd like to build a page for it, but I can't as long as the redirect is there...Scarletsmith 06:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

If you'll write it go ahead and take it off. Just make sure to put a link to discovery channel on that page and vice versa. RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 03:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Discovery Health Channel article written. Thanks! Scarletsmith 23:15, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] censored and spam

How is Spam an accurate term for posting facts? I make no claims to my talents as a writer, however I ask that you allow FACTS to remain. Relevance is relative. Here are the other articles mentioned by Jacqui, most contributions are unpopular, however all are true and most have managed to remain and expand, despite repeated removal: Wang Xia Falun Gong Paul A. Bonacci Gary Caradori Bunnatine Greenhouse Conspiracy of Silence Yorkshire Television The Franklin Coverup David H. Safavian

• I'm not sure if I'm the Jacqui you're talking about, or if you mean someone else, but I've never seen most of those links in my life. In any case, the facts remain at Conspiracy of Silence, etc. THis is a page about the Discovery Channel, itself. Please respect that. There are see also links on this page, and that is one of them. Thanks. Jacqui ^{★ 00:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)}

• Reading back on my comments, I do realize that "spammed" was not the verb I meant. It was inflammatory and I'm sorry. What I meant was that the user has been contributing to Wikipedia mostly regarding this topic, in a number of places. Oh, and by the way, please sign your comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~ Jacqui ^{★ 01:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)}

This subject was posted on Wikipedia:Third_opinion. My opinion is that Conspiracy of Silence should not have its own section.

I removed the remaining sentence detailing this claim as it was (and had remained) uncited for almost 1 year now.Jvandyke 03:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Idea

I'm going to go to bed now and come back and do some of this later, but I just thought of the fact that we can use "what links here" to see what other articles link here, and what they say about TDC. That information may be helpful for us. Jacqui ^{★ 07:11, 31 October 2005 (UTC)}

[edit] official name?

What exactly is the official name of the network? Is it TDC, Discovery, or Discovery Communications, inc.? Also about the sub-networks, should we include a brief line or two about it or just link to that network's page? Gflores 00:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

The offical name is Discovery Channel, as seen on their official site.

Discovery Channel is the brand that is primarily a cable network. Discovery Communications is the parent organization.

[edit] Brought to you by...

This really reads like a discovery channel advertisement - complete with logos. It would be interesting to see some facts about corporate organization, etc. If such might be considered wirthy, I'd be happy to do the research myself

• I've used SEC filings by Discovery Holding Company to insert information on Discovery Communications Inc. the company which owns and manages the Discovery Channel. I'd recommend that 1) someone cleanup the information - I quoted fairly extensively 2) a separation of Discovery Channel and Discovery Communications -- currently they are the same page which is confusing.Jvandyke 18:46, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I figured out how to fix the redirect. I've moved all the Discovery Communications information to that respective page, put a 'see [Discovery Channel]' pointer and removed the content that was previously here. You may want to reduce the amount of information about Discovery Communications such as the details on the other channels besides Discovery Channel..Jvandyke 20:41, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taglines

Wasn't "explore your world" a Discovery Channel tagline at one time? Want confirmation before I put this in. Dwp49423 23:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, it was. They used it until 2002.

[edit] Retail outlets

Did they take over The Nature Company? I did a Google search for The Nature Company, and it directed me to the Discovery Channel Stores. If so, this should be noted, as well as a page created for The Nature Company, with the latter categorized under "Defunct US retail chains."

[edit] Criticism

At least in Canada, they've really watered down their science programming. They have shows that don't really deal with science at all, and they even have blatant pseudoscience shows (The Haunting). I doubt that I'm the only one annoyed at this. Could we add a criticism section? --Havermayer 00:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I second that request.--84.175.219.172 09:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I.. third it. I think it's ridiculous to see a show on a channel that claims to be scientific followed by "Based on a story by..." Berry2K 17:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

And let's not forget the neverending stream of "Jesus: The Sordid New Scandal" and "Jesus: Was he a male prostitute?" type of shows. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.184.123.58 (talk) 06:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] SILENCE!

• What happened to Conspiracy of Silence? WizardDuck 20:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I removed the sentence detailing Conspiracy of Silence as it was (and had remained) uncited for almost 1 year now. Do you have a citation?Jvandyke 05:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'm dropping the whole issue. WizardDuck 23:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)