Template talk:ITV

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

having STV and ITV London linked is a lot simpler for readers than them having to go through the Scottish/Grampian and Carlton/LWT articles to get to them —Preceding unsigned comment added by PMA (talk • contribs)

That's not really the point. It is meant to be a list of the ITV franchise holders and there's no such franchise as north and central Scotland and London seven days a week. I'm not really sure if the STV (and it is 'STV' in capitals, as per the rules of English grammar) or ITV London articles should even exist. - Green Tentacle 18:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with GT on this one. Similarly, the "ITV Thames Valley" invention they're planning to do with bits of Meridian and, erm, Central? should not have a page nor be on this list. They're not franchises, just brand names. --Kiand 19:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

But the franchise names are never used anymore - de facto STV is a single franchise - ditto for London - on-air the splits are either invisible (London) or almost so (STV). The on-air reality should count. PMA 19:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

But the template lists franchises. Note that none of Meridian, Anglia, Central, etc have "ITV1" after them, and indeed neither does the (brand-name only) "ITV London" thats been added. --Kiand 19:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. If we were to go with on-air names, we would only have ITV1, STV (in captials!), UTV and possibly GMTV (though whether that name is even used on-air as a station (as opposed to a programme) any more is debatable). The template should list the franchise-holders (including the historical ones). All the franchise articles and the ITV and ITV1 articles detail the current on-air branding.

Kiand, the Thames Valley region is indeed being created for news purposes from bits of Merdian and most of the Central News South area (the other bits are going to Central News West). This is another inspired move for newsmaking in the Midlands, up there with the fact that Central News East is now broadcast from Birmingham — in the West Midlands. - Green Tentacle 21:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Regulators 2 Vandalism! 3 Width 4 "Non-franchise" 5 New layout 6 Generalization

[edit] Regulators

I am just wondering why the broadcasting regulators are part of the template, it does give the impression that they are part of ITV to those readers who may not know about ITV and the broadcasting regulators. To avoid confusion, would it be better to remove the regulators? (or at least create a separate template for the regulators?) --tgheretford (talk) 21:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism!

Who is the a*** hole that keeps changing this template and making it huge? GMc^talk 20:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Can I suggest you and 86.131.192.170 who both keep adding/reverting please talk about any changes here on this talk page. By rights you both should be blocked from editing for violating the three revert rule. Thanks. --tgheretford (talk) 20:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

As I am getting bored with this edit war, I have decided to place the two templates in question here for people to comment and make suggestions on, rather than edit warring:

• Template before editing
• Template by 86.131.192.170

Any more revert/additions and I will start warning users and requesting administrator intervention at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. --tgheretford (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Width

I widened the template by 25 pixels, as the previous width (595) was causing at least two of the lines to wrap a single word onto the following lines (which is why arbitrary use of line-breaks in templates should probably be avoided). Pixel-based widths are also probably a bad idea, as in general they do not degrade gracefully (when faced with a viewport that isn't wide enough, Bad Things™ can happen), but that's a problem for another day. 81.104.170.167 19:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Non-franchise"

This looks clunky and incorrect. ITV London is also a "non-franchise" region if you wish to include them - or otherwise leave them as "ITV Regions". Marbles333 15:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It is correct - Thames Valley isn't a franchise. And I think we'll so the same for STV... NotMuchToSay 20:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New layout

I suggest that we give the template a little makeover. Something like this:

v • d • e ITV
Companies	ITV plc · SMG plc · UTV plc · Channel Television Ltd · GMTV Ltd
Regional Franchises	Northern Scotland: Grampian · Central Scotland: Scottish · Scottish/English Border and Isle of Man: Border · Northern Ireland: UTV · North East England: Tyne Tees · Yorkshire/Lincolnshire: Yorkshire · North and North West England (Weekdays): Granada · North, Midlands, and North West England (Weekends): ABC · Wales and the West of England: TWW, WWN, ITSWW, HTV · Midlands: ATV, Central · East Anglia: Anglia · London (Weekdays only): Rediffusion, Thames, Carlton · London (Weekends only): ATV, LWT · South and South East England: Southern, TVS, Meridian · South West England: Westward, TSW, Westcountry · Channel Islands: Channel
National Franchises	Breakfast: TV-am, GMTV/GMTV2 · Teletext: ORACLE, Teletext Ltd.
Non-franchise regions	STV · ITV Thames Valley · ITV London
Digital	ITV2 · ITV3 · ITV4 · CITV Channel · Men & Motors
Brands	News: ITN, ITV News · Sport: ITV Sport · Gaming: ITV Play · Children: CITV · Weather: ITV Weather · Mobile: ITV Mobile
Online	itv.com, ITV Local, Friends Reunited
Independent Television Regulators	ITA (1955-72) · IBA (1972-92) · ITC (1991-2003) · Ofcom (2003-present)

ITV ITV

[edit] Generalization

The sections at the bottom are pontless, containing 1 link each. Why not merge them into an "other"? Anthrcer (click to talk to me) 12:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)