Talk:List of United States pay television channels

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Television

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as High-importance).

Owner column is hugely misleading, because by listing direct corporate ownership, you miss that virtually all the channels ultimately are owned by just a few media giants. A&E, for example, is jointly owned by Disney and Hearst. And what purpose does "organized by genre" serve, that could not be served better by making "genre" a sortable column?

two questions about the defunct channels section...

SpikeTV is listed as defunct. I've never watched it, but the wikipedia article on that network itself seems to show it as being still very much alive.

Second, what about the extremely short-lived comedy channel "Ha!" It's not listed.

more

THIS Page needs serious work!!!! It lists TVLand as defunct.

Also, it does NOT list The Comedy Channel and Ha! The Comedy Channel was owned by HBO, Ha! was an MTV network - they merged in 1991 to form Comedy Central.

Keeping this page in shape

This article needs some cleanup. I reworked the defunct networks section dividing the list up between networks that simply ceased operating, those that merge with another network. I removed temporarily the names of networks that still operate under a different name (even if programming theme changed). I will add them back in the form of a chart showing former and current names of network. --Cab88 13:44, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

I'm assuming you did most of the recent edits, Cab88? Good job. You wouldn't ever know there had been a major problem with it.

I've been making a few of my own additions the last day or so.

Notes about TV channels

i like good,straight & approitate tv networks but i do not like adult orientned and gay & lebsian networks.134.124.92.223 17:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody cares.--71.203.147.175 (talk) 19:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questioning the need to organize list into Tables

I would like a comment from the person responsible for organizing this list into tables, based on the various channel sections? I don't see the reason to do it, personally I feel the list was fine as it was and it looked better as a standard list than as a table. It is hard to distinguish channel names and who owns what, whereas with the list format it is very easy to see and understand. I recommend reverting back to the previous style and will go ahead with this edit if I have not heard any feedback from anyone on this issue. HeMan5 17:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that the OWNER of the channels was important and could best be demonstrated with a table. Others have agreed by converting sections to table as well. Maybe we should take a vote before anything is done. user:mnw2000 17:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have decided to keep the tables, I made some style changes to them though. I changed the background color and text color, as well I bolded the channel names so they stand out better. I think it looks okay, but I don't think all sections should be put in tables, some should remain as is IMO. HeMan5 04:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Animation

Cartoon Network and Boomerang are not only for children. Perhaps these channels should have their own "animation" categorySmiloid 07:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Logos are nice but they are a bit big.

What do you all think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mnw2000 (talk • contribs) 05:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Unfortunately, I don't think they should be here; they seem to fail the non-free content policy. I think I'll leave the job of removing them to someone else, though — excising an entire column looks like a tedious, difficult job to me. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the time you wrote that, me and others already took care of it. It took about an hour to remove the logos. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, user DJvac (talk · contribs) had restored the logos after you had removed them, and that was the revision I had seen when I wrote the comment. I wasn't aware of the prior removal; else I'd have just reverted to that! --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok, they happen (I didn't see the reversal of the edits me and others did before I did my post too). Anyways, I left DJvac a message about the situation, since I think it was an instance of maybe someone who doesn't know their way around Wikipedia and needed some guidance. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First Cable Television Network

What was the world's first cable television network?--98.195.141.44 22:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HD column

As more and more cable networks are adding HD channels, I have added a column (to Arts and Entertainment to start) that lists the HD channel, if one exists. If there is a specific wikipage for the HD version of the network, I have included the link. If anyone can help update date the rest and make sure that my research is correct, I would appreciate it. 72.227.156.171 (talk) 03:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PBS Kids Go! Channel

The PBS Kids Go! Channel was slated for October 2006, but never was launched and most likely never will be launched. However, it is listed here as it will launch. The PBS Kids Go! video player replaced their plans for the channel. Please remove it from this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.254.157 (talk) 03:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Things I Added...

...were NOT VOD services. And, furthermore, I worked hard to Wiki-ize the "ethnic" channels list, only to have it all reverted for no reason. You guys suck.--66.177.73.86 (talk) 15:25, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restructuring needed

I think this article could be a great resource, but as of right now, it's totally unwieldy. I propose to create a unified sortable table, which will reduce the article size, and make locating a channel quicker and easier. It could look something like this:

Channel	HD	Feeds	Owner	Genre	Launched
The Blah Channel	Yes	East/West	Company X	News	January 1, 2011

Another thing that will make this list tons more usable is the elimination of the huge TOC, which won't be needed with a unified sortable table. It's a lot of work, and not every cable and satellite channel available in the United States is listed here, which needs to be researched and omissions added, but I'd like to try this. Any help will be appreciated. Jmj713 (talk) 00:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a good idea, it works better than breaking up the article into seperate lists, plus this seams the only way to get the launch dates up on the list,--J intela (talk) 21:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Television or Cable network programmer

Hi, I know this may not be the appropriate spot for this topic but does anybody know where I can find/ get in touch/ get information regarding anybody who has experience working as a cable network or television network program person? This has nothing to do with computer programming. Thank you greatly.

Second Audio Program (SAP)

Hy to all, While is true that some channel have SAP in spanish, not all channel listed here have spanish audio. May be is confussion about latin america version. for example Animal Planet Latin America have both audio feed Spanish primary, secondary english. but USA version only have english audio. The only BASIC channel that have SAP in spanish is: Boomerang, Cartoon Network, Disney XD, FX, Lifetime, TBS, TNT, USA (only a ww championsih program). Need confirm: Nickelodeon, Nicktoon, Disney Channel. Premiun Channel like HBO, MAX, SHO, STARZ have SAP spanish in near 95% of their program. Need confirm: EPIX. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.50.10.114 (talk) 12:31, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Founding

Ok, but we really need the years these networks were founded. --J intela (talk) 07:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The founding information is on the individual articles and since this page has very little space as it is, I think leaving it with the information currently on there is enough. Let the founding dates to the articles themselves. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, dose anyone really have the enegry to look though hundreds of articles to find there founding dates, what if some one wants a list of these networks in chronological order, this is usefull and relevent information!--J intela (talk) 21:36, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's on my "To Do" list....along curing Cancer, building a time machine and going out Emma Watson. Seriously, I am trying to find time (and energy) to work on that. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I did try to get things started, and as a collaberative effort I'm sure it would fill up over time, and I would be willing to work on it more...--J intela (talk) 02:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but since it is on the article page (the page for the network itself), it really doesn't have to be on this one. An editor once told me that somethings should be kept simple, this is one of them. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:28, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

fx and BTN

Where is fx (Fox Extreme) in this list? - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.238.38.47 (talk • contribs)

That's a really good question. For whatever reason, it isn't on the list. I'll add that now. Good catch. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:16, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.238.38.47 (talk) 21:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTN network (joint venture with Fox) is also missing. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Kent.NP (talk • contribs)

That one is listed under "Regional sports networks". - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:11, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of United States cable and satellite television networks. 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/20110831002843/http://www.god.tv/node/1 to http://www.god.tv/node/1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:07, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did review the edit and found the link to contain more of an advertising type of "what we are about" content rather than a direct reference to the subject matter so I did what any inexperienced new user would do, I simply removed it. I would have tried to use all your "bot tools" and such things to fix the link, but that's  well beyond my level of advancement as an editor at this point. I went to your bot faq page User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot thinking maybe I could figure it all out, but it was just a bit too daunting for me. So, that's all I know to help you improve your IAB. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. Huggums537 (talk) 12:13, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
I see exactly what happened now. The bot correctly identified the dead link and "rescued" it. However, the link created by the Internet Archive points to an invalid source which is not properly cited, most likely because the original link was not properly cited when it was first referenced. I'm sure it's not the fault of the bot because the bot has no way of determining if a dead link was properly cited to begin with since it can probably only find dead links and rescue them, but I thought you said that you made the edit and modified the link yourself... So, I'm guessing you used the bot to fix the dead link and took it on good faith that the original link was referenced correctly, then left the reviewing for us? Man, I walked right into this one! :) Huggums537 (talk) 18:33, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OMG...I just realized I've been spilling my guts to a freaking bot!!! For shame, for shame. Go ahead Wikipedia, laugh it up you smug mugs! Huggums537 (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Religious networks

I added Scientology Network to the religious list. Why is this removed? Add it again whoever took it away.

Merge Genres

I Have reorganised this page by merging the national networks into one single table. This allows people to order by genre, HD availability or channel owner as they see fit. This gives a more informative experience as you will now be able to see the channels owned by a single broadcaster together. I have also added citations to the end of the introduction for the 5 major tv providers in the US which can be used to update this page. As I have noted in the introduction there are over 2,600 tv providers in the US so checking over all of those for missed channels will be a huge task, the 5 major providers should cover the vast majority of available channels. - January 2020.

The Genres make no sense.

Variety implies a mix of different formats and genres, but Discovery Channel is predominantly unscripted, factual programming.

Networks like Fuse, Aspire, & BET target ethnic audiences; while Lifetime is aimed at female audiences, yet the latter is listed as a lifestyle network.

Scripted implies that these networks air nothing but, yet Paramount Network is a general entertainment outlet that airs a mix of scripted and unscripted programming (just like USA Network).

Sundance TV shouldn't be classified as a Movie network as they also air scripted television shows, no different to AMC and IFC.

BET Her only airs Music videos during the mornings. The rest of the network's programming targets the same Afro-American audience as BET, but skews older and female.Thecleanerand (talk) 21:25, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

INSP Channel?

I disagree with the category of the INSP Channel as a kids channel. It could be a family channel, but I don't consider it to be marketed towards children like how Disney or Nickelodeon is. I think it should be in a different category. 47.12.180.193 (talk) 03:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FAST channels

Should the list include free ad-supported streaming television channels? These are streaming television channels represented to offer programming without a paid subscription, funded exclusively by advertising. 2603:8001:B202:3294:5A2:48B3:9D45:7399 (talk) 00:13, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]