Talk:Disney XD/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Disney XD. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Program argument

I think until we get an actual schedule from the network, that part of the article should be deleted for now. There's too much conflict over what's on it or not, and until we see it in a schedule grid, there's no need for it. Nate • (chatter) 06:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so, i had this page semi-protected to prevent IPs inserting speculation about the programming. Now registered users are doing it too, i think this page should fully-protected now. Elbutler (talk) 12:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Good idea; I knew some of the shows were a slam-dunk and confirmed to be on the schedule, but I thought we could deal with it without the protection being ratcheted up by just taking it all out, period. Obviously that wasn't the case and I support the full protect until the network starts or at the very least we get a view of the grid. Nate • (chatter) 00:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Source for X-Men, Hulk, etc

The source for the X-Men, Hulk, etc shows links to an Angelfire website. Such websites are typically amateurish and possibly unreliable. Retromaniac (talk) 00:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Static Shock

I saw on the promo that Static shock was coming to Disney XD but we cannot edit the page anymore so I put it here(Tdif) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdifan444 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Is this the promo to which you were referring? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reQP3O60L_A I am the 0dd1. (talk) 01:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that promo also. Static Shock is coming to Disney XD. It was on Toon Disney/Disney Channel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.199.161.221 (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

LDEJRuff here with a question:

Is The Lion King's Timon & Pumbaa going to be on Disney XD? If not, then it should come to Disney DVD in Seasonal DVD box sets.

Then again, make that two questions. My second question is: Is Chaotic also going to be on the new channel?

According to The Walt Disney Company Chaotic will be aired on Disney XD Matthew Cantrell (talk) 06:22, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Or, better yet, make that three. Will Toon Disney and Jetix become online networks in the future? It happened with The WB and Kids' WB.
~~LDEJRuff~~ ^{(see what I've contributed)} 00:01, January 3 2009 (EDT)

Probably no to all three. The TDA boxsets never made much market headway, the rights to Chaotic are held by 4Kids Entertainment (e.g. not going to cable anytime soon), and Disney doesn't do online networks. The only reason 4Kids went fully online was because of force, and the entire mixed branding of Toon Disney and Jetix has been a failure since they spread it across two networks and then diluted the missions of each. Once a Disney brand is phased out, it's gone. Nate • (chatter) 11:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

But I, along with other Lion King fans, love Timon & Pumbaa. And what will the kids think if Timon & Pumbaa probably won't be on the new channel?

~~LDEJRuff~~ ^{(see what I've contributed)} 02:02, January 6 2009 (EDT) —Preceding undated comment was added at 07:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC).

Disney XD will make its broadcast debut at midnight on Friday, February 13th.

Disney XD will make its broadcast debut at midnight on Friday, February 13th. Please read the following article about this: http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6627004.html AdamDeanHall (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Not done No edit requested. Sandstein 23:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I already told you about the launch date of Disney XD, so will you please edit the protected page and add the February 13th launch date? Please let me know. This is very important. Thank you. AdamDeanHall (talk) 16:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Already done. --El on ka 19:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Disney XD On TV

Disney XD will run on Direct TV channel number 292 and on Dish Network channel number 174. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.245.10.14 (talk) 02:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Of course it will. It's replacing Toon Disney so it's doubtful the channel will move. Nate • (chatter) 08:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Static Shock

The promo I watched last night showed a preview for Static Shock so I'll add it in Matthew Cantrell (talk) 16:21, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if you can do that now, seeing is how you're not an admin. I already talked to Caknuck about the show, and the promo, and he already replied to me. And I fixed the link to that show.

~~LDEJRuff~~ ^{(see what I've contributed)} 18:12, 12 January 2009 (EDT)

Unprotect please

{{editprotected}}

Not done: - Requests for unprotection should be made at WP:RFUP. You can also ask the administrator who protected the page. - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Mistake

To the launched area, change the "February 2009" text to "February 13, 2009" or "13 February 2009" just add 13 to the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.30.53 (talk) 21:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

toonzone schedule reliable?

is toonzone`s schedule reliable?it said that the following would air: Get Ed Oban Star-Racers A.T.O.M. Digimon Wendy Wu: Homecoming Warrior(movie) Super Robot Monkey Team Hyperforce Go! American Dragon: Jake Long Static Shock Spider-Man Unlimited Jackie Chan Adventures Pinky and the Brain and Tarzan. please update the list —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melio3 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Unprotect please

{{editprotected}} - There was somthing I wanted to edit but it was protected again. Just unprotectet for 15 minites please. Leave a message in my talk page if you do. 98.218.94.104 (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

The proper way to use this request it to state beforehand the edit you wish to have done, and an administer will do the actual editing for you. Try WP:Unprotect if you want the page unprotected. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 03:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Cable Channels

There's a new addition to the channel list I want to add

io Digital Cable Channel 121 —Preceding unsigned comment added by SnorlaxShamen (talk • contribs) 23:36, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is true. I also have Disney XD on Ch. 121 for IO Digital Cable. 68.196.51.65 (talk) 14:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

angelfire link

is now an 404 not found page. Please remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.245.206 (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

disney filmore

i found on the programing guide on tv that disney filmore is on the lineup at 3/17/09. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.18.200 (talk) 20:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Merged Toon Disney into this article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

No consensus for a merge. This may be something which should be revisited in a year or so, when Disney XD has become more well known and Toon Disney has faded in significance.--Aervanath (talk) 05:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I merged Toon Disney into this article. It was rebranded and renamed and therefore doesn't need a separate article. If people keep continuing to unmerge it I will ask for a re-name block.TomCat4680 (talk) 16:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you propose a merge first see Help:Merging and moving pages --Gman124^talk 16:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I didn't feel it was neccessary. It was a a selective paste merger and the merger page (that I obviously already read) clearly states that no consensus is needed. Please stop sending me messages on my talk page, keep them on this page.TomCat4680 (talk) 16:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

It is a controversial merge. So I have placed merge tags. So don't merge until a consensus has been reached. --Gman124^talk 16:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

How is it controversial? I kept all of the relevant information. If you unmerge it again I'll ask for a re-name blockTomCat4680 (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

We are supposed to Propose a Merge to not have to go into a edit war, and currently we have. So I will place a merge tag on both pages and let the consensus reach and then merge them if that's what other users want. --Gman124^talk 17:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

There's no rule that says you "must" propose a merger. Contrarily, it says if you feel the separate page is unnecessary, just merge it yourself without an unnecessary discussion like this one.TomCat4680 (talk) 17:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

It also says "If the merger is controversial, however, you may find your merger reverted, and as with all other edits, edit wars should be avoided. If you are uncertain of the merger's appropriateness, or believe it might be controversial, or your merge ends up reverted, you can propose it on either or both of the affected pages" --Gman124^talk 17:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

They aren't the same channels. So don't merge them. --Gman124^talk 17:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Have you checked the program lineup? Most of the shows from Toon Disney are still on Disney XD. The only new show so far is Aaron Stone.TomCat4680 (talk) 17:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

This is not fair. Unmerge Toon Disney and Disney XD and give them independence or this page will be abandoned.

Life isn't fair. Defunct channels that became a new channel don't need their own articles, its more appropriate to have them as a "History" section of the new channel's article.TomCat4680 (talk) 17:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it should not be merged Powergate92Talk 17:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

no merging of toon disney. --Gman124^talk 17:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that Toon Disney should be merged into this page. It exsisted for years. It should have it's own page. The Cool Kat (talk) 17:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, even if such merger should take place I would suspect that Toon Disney should be the one merged TO, as Wikipedia is about historical relevance and not what's the most recent. One could not even begin to argue that "Disney XD" is more well known, given that it's only been around for a couple of weeks. As a matter of fact, given that nothing appears to have changed other than the name of the channel, I would say that XD should be merged into Toon Disney, with the lead stipulating that the channel is currently known as "XD". There does not need to be two separate pages for the same topic. It wasn't like this was something completely new (ala the merging of The WB and UPN into The CW). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it's more like Toon Disney being replaced by XD rather than being renamed. --Gman124^talk 19:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Gman124 it is more like Toon Disney being replaced by XD. Powergate92Talk 19:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Are they running the same programming? Has anything changed beyond the name of the channel? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Some of the sources [1] [2] do say that it will now be more aimed at guys 6-14. I don't think it was like that with toon disney--Gman124^talk 19:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Bignole's right, not much has changed. Maybe we should get some opinions from Wikiproject Television? The Cool Kat (talk) 20:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I already informed Wikiproject Television to comment here about the merger. --Gman124^talk 20:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The sources you provided kind of pose the same dilemma we're already in. One discusses XD as Toon's replacement (like how The CW replaced The WB and UPN), while the second source discusses it as if Toon is just going by a new name. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Its basically just a rename. Most of the shows that were on TD are still on DXD. There's only been 1 new show that I know of (Aaron Stone). I don't see what's wrong with merging TD into DXD, keeping the article name as Disney XD, and having a section about TD named History, like I originally did so. I still don't understand exactly why this merger is being challenged, I kept all of the relevant HISTORICAL info intact. There's no need for 2 articles. TomCat4680 (talk) 20:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

My problem with that direction of a merge is that Toon has had over 10 years of history behind it, and this new name only has like 2 weeks. Toon should be the primary, with a mentioning that DX is the current name of the channel, because it's still owned by Disney, it's the same channel, the programs are still the same, and for all intents and purposes they just relabeled it. Regardless of the decision to go merge to DX or Toon, there certainly does not need to be 2 distinct pages. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Well under that theory we should label the WFAN article as its former callsign WNBC (AM), since WNBC AM was around much longer than WFAN has been. TomCat4680 (talk) 21:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Different owner. That was a true replacement. Now, I'm just going by the Wiki page, but WNBC AM is/was owned by NBC, while WFAN is owned by CBS. That was CBS taking over that particular radio station, previously rented by NBC. So, my theory doesn't really apply there (as I pointed out, it's not the same as The CW replacing The WB and UPN). That said, I'm sure there are plenty of pages that are out there and probably should be renamed, if you subscribe to my understanding that Wikipedia is built on historical facts and not current events. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

~~Fine, merge with Toon Disney.~~ --~~Gman124~~^talk ~~21:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)~~

But don't redirect talk pages as was done here. They should be kept for historical purposes. --Gman124^talk 21:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Wiki is based on both, there's thousands upon thousands of articles that are updated almost daily because of recent events. Wiki is NOT purely a history book, its an interactive encyclopedia with information that is both current AND historical. Thats why there's templates like {{update}}, {{current event}}, {{pending legislation}}, {{future sport team}}, {{future tv show}}, {{future tv channel}}, the list is endless. TomCat4680 (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I didn't mean it as "we shouldn't update till it's historical fact", but that pages should be not governed by what is "most recent" because "recent" lacks historical strength and what happens today might be overridden tomorrow. So, while we technically edit based on "current events" (i.e. whatever new news we hear about), and we should, it just shouldn't take favoritism over what is already historically known. IMO of what the spirit of Wiki is. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

If you read just about any article about a TV channel or radio station that has changed names but not format or owner, the article it labeled as the current name and the first half, 3/4 or 2/3 is usually about the current branding, and the second half, quarter or third is a historical section about the former names(s). Its pretty much universal.TomCat4680 (talk) 21:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Which ones. Did they just recently change, or has the new station been around just as long as the old station? There does come a point when the "most recent" station is the one most well known. Fox Kids apparently went through a brief name change before ending completely (They were bought out by a new corporation, which is why there is a new page for 4kids, instead of just a take on like Fox Box was for Fox Kids). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bignole (talk • contribs) 17:09, March 8, 2009

None of those articles are about full cable channels, they're about syndicated programming blocks and therefore irrelevant to this discussion.TomCat4680 (talk) 22:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Then provide some actual ones that are. You provided FAN and WNBC before, but they were not even the same programming. They were two different radio stations that appeared on the same frequency channel (not the same, as one took over the channel when the first one departed). We've seen plenty of examples of what happens when a completely new program takes over the channel, but you are claiming there are a bunch of other channel pages that support your choice in moving this all over to DX. I'm still waiting on those example to come up so that I can see for myself. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok fine if you really need some examples read Versus (formerly Outdoor Life Network), Spike TV (formerly TNN), TruTV (formerly Court TV), thats just the tip of the iceberg.TomCat4680 (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Just thought of some more Palladia (formerly Music HD), HLN (formerly CNN2 and CNN Headline News). Convinced yet? None of the former names have separate articles, they're all part of the newer channel's article under the history section. TomCat4680 (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The America's Talking still has a separate page from MSNBC, and CNBC just changed it to their short form name. --Gman124^talk 23:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes I saw that, which is why I took it down. I should merge them all too since they're stubs, but I don't feel like it, especially if its going to start a giant debate like this one.TomCat4680 (talk) 23:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Spike has been around for over 6 years, so it is the primary usage for that channel. HLN is still "Headline News", it's just abbreviated. Palladia was known by multiple names depending on the channel running it. If people think we should merge to XD, then that's fine, but I think a proper naming convention needs to be established because there seems to be some confusion over what constitutes a NEW channel, what's just a renaming of the same channel, and which should come first the chicken or the egg (i.e. Should we keep with the historical perspective or go with the most current name). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Well if your read the Spike article you would have seen that it was TNN since 1983. Most people who had cable in the 80's and 90's remember it as TNN. Same way with TruTV / Court TV, most people still call it Court TV. However, that doesn't mean the channels need their own separate articles though, they're basically the same thing like you said, and a historical subsection is sufficient.TomCat4680 (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I think if we merged the articles then the article should have the network current name. Powergate92Talk 00:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we have enough votes to reach a consensus. Does anyone else hav any other suggestions or votes? The Cool Kat (talk) 21:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

What exactly is the consensus then? Some say do nothing, some are for the merge, some are against it? TomCat4680 (talk) 21:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you should wait a few days before reaching to a conclusion, to to get as much input as possible. It's only been like 6 hours since the merge was proposed. --Gman124^talk 21:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Gman124 we should wait a few days. Powergate92Talk 22:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Wait a few more days. Personally, I don't think the two should be merged. They are two totally different channels. Lamborghini man 12:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

They are not, they're exactly the same. Same shows, same owner, only thing different is the name.TomCat4680 (talk) 00:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

And the type of shows they air, as I already said above that they are now aimed at guys 6-14. So they won't show those shows that girls like, or those that would be aimed at them. If they have different content then that right there makes it a different channel. --Gman124^talk 01:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Who said the channel was aimed at girls originally? From what I see in the two program lineups, they are all the same as they were before. They were showing Spider-Man and Hulk a year ago. Did they cancel any of their "girly" programs? Just because they say that is their focus doesn't mean that wasn't already their focus. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

If you look at List of programs broadcast by Toon Disney and the current lineup you would see that in XD they have shows that only most likely guys would watch, While on Toon Disney did have those "girly shows", they had shows like Sabrina and Kim posible. Do they show them on DX? So no, before they didn't aim Toon Disney just at guys, while DX is. --Gman124^talk 01:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

First, it seems like you're getting an attitude with me (e.g., "So no"). Looking at the list, what girl shows were still being aired when Toon Disney stopped being called "Toon Disney"? From what I can tell, most of those shows ended back in 2006. New episodes of Kim Possible stopped in 2007. Were there any that were still running new episodes that were canceled when DX started? DX might not create any new straight "girl" shows, but that's hardly a drastic change. If Toon Disney had stopped making "girl" episodes would we have created a completely new page called "Toon Disney for Boys"? IMO, when the vast majority (about 95%) of your programming is the same stuff that was on your former name, then you aren't a "new" channel, just a renamed one. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't reruns also count? --Gman124^talk 01:31, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

IMO, not unless there is a significant difference in programming. Say Toon Disney had 50 different shows. DX picks up all of the shows but the "girly" ones, and that means they lost 10 shows. That's not a lot compared to how many are still there, especially when those shows were just reruns to begin with, and were not new programming that was canceled to make way for a boy-centered channel. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I dont think you should merge because: 1.Disney XD has new stuff like new shows, ESPN stuff,etc. 2.animation had a bigger role on Toon Disney. 3.different name, different network.

Melio3 (talk) 18:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Just leave the articles alone. They are fine as they are. Lamborghini man 11:19, 11 March 2009

agreed, toon disney is notable enough for its own article, it and disney xd are way different Jeremie Belpois (talk) 04:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Look TomCat4680, they are two totally different channels. They are NOT the same, all right? Its obvious that most people on here DON'T agree that the merger should take place. So just leave them alone. The articles are fine as they are. Sorry, but some things just don't work the way you want. Lamborghini man 12:10 1, April 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

recess

recess is now on disney xd according to unamed user . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclone39 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

no

June 2009

Cory in the House and X-Men: Evolution are also now on the Disney XD schedule reguarly. (By justin as off june 15 2009)

Justin you also forgot next x miniseries and shawn the sheep/minuscule — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.214.59 (talk) 20:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-Protected?

Does this page really need semi-protection lock on it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.199.53 (talk) 04:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, because constant unsourced rumors by unverified accounts were constantly being made.--Lamborghini man (talk) 12:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

US channel or global brand?

It's not entirely clear whether this article (Disney XD) is meant to be about the US Disney XD channel, or the global Disney XD brand (which includes channels named Disney XD in many countries worldwide). It seems to me that if we have separate articles for Disney XD (France), Disney XD (Greece), Disney XD (UK & Ireland), and so forth, the Disney XD article ought to be about the brand as a whole (with history of the switchover from Jetix and so forth), while the content about the US channel should be moved to a new article titled Disney XD (USA) or something similar. The model at Disney Channel and Disney Channel (international) is also possible, but it looks to me as if the Disney XD brand was created for global use (Jetix channels have changed to the Disney XD moniker worldwide in 2009), so I'd imagine that a solid article could be created with an appropriate overview (and links to all the national varieties, including the US channel).

Any WikiProject Disney folks care to take up the challenge? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a lot better the way it is now. Thanks for bringing the issue up.--Lamborghini man (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Having Disney XD as mostly a set index page makes sense to me. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Is it necessary to keep the merge tags now?

Since its obvious that most people on here don't agree to a merge of the Disney XD and Toon Disney articles, is it necessary to keep the merge tags on both articles? Lamborghini man 12:16 1, April 2009 (UTC)

I agree the merge tag should be removed now. Powergate92Talk 00:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think we should try merging the articles for Toon Disney and Jetix with Disney XD again. I mean (and sorry for making the following off-topic), the article for Noggin got merged with Nick Jr., and The N with TeenNick.

~~LDEJRuff~~ ^{(see what I've contributed)} 15:28, 23 November 2009 (EDT)

It's already been decided that they will not be merger of these articles. Toon Disney and Disney XD are two totally different channels. And Jetix isn't a channel.--ETLamborghini (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, okay. ^_^;

~~LDEJRuff~~ ^{(see what I've contributed)} 19:35, 23 November 2009 (EDT)

Requested Move

Disney XD (United States) → Disney XD — I suspect that most people entering "Disney XD" into the search box are looking not for the international versions of the network, but rather the United States teelevision channel. When one types in Disney Channel into the search box, they are automatically brought to the United States version of the network, while there is a seperate article for Disney Channel (international). This can be done similarly for Disney XD as most users are not searching for the enitre collection of Disney XD channels, but just the American version. Also, Disney XD was started in the US and remains as the networks flagship channel. I suggest making this page easy to navigate to as the Disney Channel's page is. TruFL39 16:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TruFL39 (talk • contribs)

This has already been addressed and resolved.--ETLamborghini (talk) 23:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Toon Disney Merging With Disney XD

Yes, i came here because this was the talk page i was supposed to discuss on about Toon Disney merging with Disney XD. Though i did not want this merge to happen, i am just pissed off (sorry for the language but I'm just mad) because someone didn't accept me returning The N and Noggin articles back to their previous states. I believe that Toon Disney should not have its own article if The N and Noggin can't. In my opinion, its either return The N and Noggin articles back to their previous states before they were turned into redirects for their successors, or turn the Toon Disney article into a redirect as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notshane (talk • contribs) 04:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Toon Disney transitioning to Disney XD is not same as Noggin & The N transitioning to Nick Jr. & TeenNick, respectively. Disney XD is promoted as channel geared to boys (a male oriented Disney Channel, if you will) as Toon Disney it wasn't gearing toward that same demographic. With Noogin/Nick Jr and The N/Teenick, they are basically the same channel just with different names. That's why those redirects are in place. Quasy Boy 23:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Merging country-specific articles

There is a clear consensus to merge the country-specific articles to Disney XD. Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 07:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

After the AfD of Disney XD (Netherlands & Flanders), several editors have placed merge tags on the rest of the country-specific articles. Each one barely has any content and it's pretty obvious that they need to be merged. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 17:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, these are essentially copies of this article with some unreferenced original research thrown in. Dedicated articles are not needed here.--RadioFan (talk) 22:09, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

After no further discussion, unreferenced articles have been redirected here. The following do have some references and will need a bit more inspection for merging. Much of it is pretty mundane and not worthy of merging but it's worth looking at further. Help here would be appreciated.

--RadioFan (talk) 16:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Done--RadioFan (talk) 13:03, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell you deleted the content on the Canadian and Polish pages without adding any of it to the main. I don't know about the other countries, but the Canadian channel isn't even owned by Disney. None of the data in the main infobox applies to it. Also, the three sections in the main have "Main article" links that now redirect to itself. Msgohan (talk) 23:17, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't do that. Someone came in this morning and added all of those links. Unfortunately, they also added a lot of content with the same edit so I couldn't flat-out revert. I'll try to fix it up a little ASAP. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 23:43, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Only content that is sufficiently referenced was moved. Any referenced content that replicated what was already in the article was not moved. If you disagree, feel free to improve the main article but make sure it's referenced. There was a lot of original research in these articles and none of it was moved. --RadioFan (talk) 01:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Agree with merge. --→gab 24dot grab← 19:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Support - I also support this merge. United States Man (talk) 00:23, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Redirects for discussion

I have nominated a number of redirects for discussion that affect this page. 117Avenue (talk) 07:20, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2020

This edit request to Disney XD has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Disney XD's target audience is kids 6-14, not 6-15 24.198.164.225 (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jack Frost (talk) 07:31, 19 September 2020 (UTC)