Talk:Disney General Entertainment Content

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Disney–ABC Television Group. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:31, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Disney–ABC Television Group. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]


https://www.ocregister.com/2017/12/14/how-the-disney-fox-deal-affects-local-sports-coverage/

Update Fox Sports regional edition like Fox Sports West is currently being discussed to go to Disney as a result of the Fox Disney deal in 2017. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.130.165 (talk) 01:09, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ABC Group[edit]

There only seems to be one citation which calls the company "ABC Group", and even then, the full sentence is "Disney-owned ABC Group". This doesn't mean that the governing company of ABC's assets was called ABC Group. Are there any other sources that confirm this company being called ABC Group? Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 16:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does "mean that the governing company of ABC's assets was called ABC Group." As the New York Times was calling it that (thus possible WP:COMMONNAME at the time if not a asssumed name/DBA official name if not legal name as the sources shows the legal name is ABC, Inc.).
Here is another source that you wanted. Encyclopedia of Television. Iger, Robert A. article: "In spite of these apparent failures, Iger was pro-moted (sic) in February 1999 to a new position as chairman of the ABC Group and President of Walt Disney International, ..." Spshu (talk) 18:46, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It's preferable to have more than one source to verify something like this. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 13:37, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Old and New company pages[edit]

I have added tags to suggest that Capital Cities/ABC Inc. is merged into Disney-ABC Television Group since they are now the same company. Merging these two pages would make it easier to find information about the pre- and post-Disney companies. LeahG22 (talk) 00:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Despite Disney–ABC Television Group being the successor brand of Capital Cities/ABC, there's enough content and distinction between the two phases of the company to warrant the separate articles. And besides, once Capital Cities/ABC was integrated into The Walt Disney Company, a lot of assets that defined Capital Cities/ABC were sold off. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 09:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 March 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved


Disney–ABC Television Group → Walt Disney Television – Disney-ABC Television Group was renamed to "Walt Disney Television" following 21st Century acquisition. Walt Disney Television had been set to temporarily redirect here while the deal was pending. But it should now be the official page. Starforce13 (talk) 04:22, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

pinging @JJMC89: since you had helped keep the page here until the deal completed. Starforce13 (talk) 04:56, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion on this. I only moved it at Spshu's request. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:08, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Spshu:, any opposition to moving this back to "Walt Disney Television" since the deal is now complete?
  • Move. No opposition as deal is completed per source at Acquisition of 21st Century Fox by Disney. We do need to untangle the wiki links for the production company from Walt Disney Television to Walt Disney Television (production company) though. Spshu (talk) 12:56, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Since there's no further opposition, it looks like we have a consensus to move. Yes, links for the production company will need to be updated with time. Starforce13 (talk) 13:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Division vs Subsidiary[edit]

Walt Disney Television is a division - not a subsidiary. All the cited articles as well as [official website] describe Walt Disney Television and Disney Television Studios as divisions - not subsidiaries. There is no reliable source that describes them as subsidiaries. The current cited source for making it subsidiary (the California database) doesn't distinguish between subsidiaries and divisions. It describes them the same way. It describes them similar to non-disputable division like Disney Parks, Walt Disney Studios and Disney Direct to Consumer and International divisions. So, using it to call one subsidiary or division is misleading and incorrect. Pinging @Spshu: - please provide a better source for calling it a subsidiary. And if you're going to cite that database, please explain why they're to be treated differently from the other division entries - DISNEY CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND INTERACTIVE MEDIA, INC., DISNEY GLOBAL PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT AND CREATIVE, INC. and WALT DISNEY DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER & INTERNATIONAL.

Also, please understand the distinctions between subsidiaries and divisions. Subsidiaries are usually independent companies, run separately while divisions are business units based on the type of work performed / business run. A company like Lucasfilm can be removed or added to Disney without changing what Disney does... but removing Walt Disney Studios division would completely change what Disney does. Similarly, removing ABC Studios doesn't have impact on changing what Disney's businesses; but removing Walt Disney Television would change Disney's business from TV. Starforce13 (talk) 14:56, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since every source we have so far that calls it either division or subsidiary uses "division," we should keep it as division until we have another official source stating it clearly as subsidiary. We shouldn't change it based on assumptions/instincts, defying all the available sources.Starforce13 (talk) 15:12, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your source at the official website indicates in the same sentence that Walt Disney TV is a division along with ESPN (ESPN Inc.), a corporation thus a subsidiary. The California Business Database does not distinguish, since divisions would not show up in the database. You have not even looked at Disney Parks and Resorts, which is incorporated, and Disney Direct to Consumer and International, which was not initially incorporated (March 14, 2018) at formation then incorporated later (May 25, 2018). Walt Disney Studios' status is in dispute as it is believed to be Disney Enterprise, Inc. (the pre-CC/ABC, Inc. merger Disney Company) with a DBA/Trade name of Walt Disney Studios (in the stituation like ABC, Inc. was DBA as Disney-ABC TV Group), so it was kept at division, its original WP designation. No using the database is not "call one subsidiary or division is misleading and incorrect." It will definitively tell you if they are a corporation (thus a subsidiary, since we know they are owned by the Disney Company) that is incorporated in that state or a "foreign" (another US state) corporation or LLC registered to operate in that state if listed. They are not being treated differently, it is you being unaware of the facts. There isn't even a DISNEY GLOBAL PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT AND CREATIVE, INC. WP article, but with the Inc. suffix which only corporations may use gives away the fact that it is incorporation thus a subsidiary. And that gives away DISNEY CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND INTERACTIVE MEDIA, INC.'s status too as its article states.
No you don't understand the distinction between subsidiaries and divisions. Subsidiary are corporations or limited liablity companies (LLCs) that are owned by other corporations. A division is a part of a corporation organized for a particular business or business function. It is a legal distinction while in general usage division and subsidiary they are used as synonyms.
We don't go by the subject's official source. You are changing it on "assumptions/instincts" and it is not "defying all the available sources." as the State of California Business Entity Database indicates other wise. Spshu (talk) 16:49, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
1. The California database doesn't call it a subsidiary. And putting "Inc." in the entity registration doesn't make it a subsidiary. Any business unit/segment can be incorporated. They're listing it the same way they list all the other Disney properties including divisions like parks division, some of which include "Inc." as well.
2. And based on basic business knowledge, a division is a business unit based on the TYPE of product. So, for example, with Disney, their products are films, television, parks, DTC etc... and therefore units representing those are called "divisions" or "segments." The individual companies that form up each segment / division are the subsidiaries. So, a unit representing their television assets/media networks is a division. For example, even on the main Disney, we have Studios as a division because films are one of the product lines within Disney. While something like Marvel Entertainment is a subsidiary because it's just a company under Disney but it's not a TYPE of product.
3. Besides, just Disney, the news sites that broke the news about the appointments, all use Divisions. Starforce13 (talk) 17:14, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Learn what a subsidiary is!!!! To simplify the definition for you: a subsidiary = corporation + ownership by another corporation. A subsidiary is incorporated. So, yes, the California database doesn't call it a subsidiary. The database indicates that it is a corporation!!! Again READ, the Parks & Resort unit is a subsidiary and has been incorrect called the parks division. A division CAN NOT by definition including Inc., Corporation, Corp., Limited, LLC, etc. The combination that we know that it is own by the Walt Disney Company (a corporation) and that it comes up as a corporation in the database makes it a subsidiary. So, you are telling me that Walt Disney Television is not owned by the Walt Disney Company!
  2. "And based on basic business knowledge, a division is a business unit based on the TYPE of product." In organizational talk as the other organizational methods are department (by function), matrix and mixed (divisions and departments). But we are talking about the actual form/type of the business, which are: sole proprietor, partnership, limited partnership, joint venture, division, company (LLC) or corporation. Segments are business areas that the company is in and reports in their financials. The individual business units that make up a segment do not have to be subsidiaries. Films are not the only product/service of the Studios segment, so is music, theatrical plays, distribution services (at times).
  3. The incorporation of the unit was after (March 14, 2019) the fact announcement of Walt Disney Television and Disney TV Studios (October 8, 2018), thus it was a division (although it would have seem to make sense that they would have retained the ABC, Inc. corporate form and just change the trade name from Disney-ABC TV Group to W.Disney TV) that was incorporated thus also becoming a subsidiary. Spshu (talk) 18:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Divisions are often registered as corporations or legal entities for legal liabilities and tax purposes - but that doesn't make them independently run companies. A corporate division can even be registered as Inc, LLC etc.[1] And if we go by your definition, then everything would be a subsidiary because Disney has registered each one of those units as "corporations" in California and other states. So, being a corporation on "incorporated" or "limited liability" isn't the distinguishing factor. That has nothing to do with how a company is run or whether they're an independently run company or a product.
Let's wait for Disney's official announcement of the TV executives and their formal SEC filings to see if they classify them as subsidiaries or divisions. If they call them "subsidiaries", I will have no problem with it being called a subsidiary. Starforce13 (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

←When division are registered as corporation then they are no longer divisions, becoming a subsidiary. Subsidiary are not necessarily independently run companies. A IT/tech website (techtarget.com) is NOT a good site for looking for business definitions. Formal SEC filings do not list all their subsidiaries. Huston Chronicles: "A wholly owned subsidiary, on the other hand, is a completely separate entity from the main business." "Because a division is an internal segment of a company, not an entirely separate entity, business owners create and end divisions at their whim." Spshu (talk) 22:18, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Disney files a list of all their subsidiaries (including the indirect ones) with SEC. For example, in the latest (Nov 2018) 10-K filing, you will see a document called "Subsidiaries of the Company". You will see some segments / divisions (e.g Direct-to-Consumer & International) filed as corporations in California are listed as Segments but missing in the subsidiaries list. That said, they listed "ABC, Inc." (Disney-ABC Television Group) as a subsidiary; so they might do the same with "Walt Disney Television, Inc." Speaking of ABC, Inc.... since they registered "Walt Disney Television" as a different entity instead of filing an amendment to rename "ABC, Inc.", I think we should say Walt Disney Television replaced Disney-ABC Television Networks. (as opposed to formerly called). Starforce13 (talk) 16:34, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am quiet aware of the exhibit EX-21 Subsidiaries of the Company and no they do not list all there subsidiaries. Segments are reporting designations selected by the company. I have found no rime nor reason to what subsidiaries are included, see Hudson Square Realty, LLC listed there. It at best is just a holding company and/or development company for the new New York City offices (mostly ABC network) at Hudson Square Realty, LLC, which is not likely a "independently run company". The existence of Disney Enterprise, Inc. on list in EX-21 and is — unless you can proof that it is Disney Studios — hold all film copyrights and that is it. Thus Disney Enterprises< Inc. would not be a subsidiary and would disqualify other units that it hold the IP to as that would not be "stand alone" companies. Subsidiaries are general not "independently run companies" unless the ultimate parent company grants them the autonomy, which MiraMax (while under the Weinsteins), Caravan Pictures and Marvel Entertainment, are the only ones I know of in the Disney conglomerate at any time were such. Spshu (talk) 17:34, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Spshu:, Honestly, it's all so muddy and I no longer feel strongly one way or the other. Since I've come to realize you're one of the best editors on Disney pages, I'm going to trust your instincts. Feel free to change to subsidiary. (You can keep the company website citation just for the part where it says they're part of Disney Media Networks.) We can close and archive this section.Starforce13 (talk) 04:58, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2020[edit]

edit 

Iphoney3 (talk) 22:16, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2020[edit]

edit 

Iphoney3 (talk) 22:22, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 November 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 05:18, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Walt Disney Television → Disney General Entertainment Content – Judging from the recent reorganization, it seems that this is the new name for most of Disney's broadcast/cable assets (excluding ESPN), with Walt Disney Television now consisting solely of Disney TV Studios and ABC Entertainment. Also placing this here as there was previous debate last year. –Piranha249 22:11, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Piranha249, Walt Disney Television and Disney General Entertainment Content are two separate entities. If you see at your argument about the move, i don't see it to move it to more appropriate title. In addition, Disney General Entertainment Content doesn't have separated article as it was part of the Walt Disney Company parent article. Maybe creating a separate article for Disney General Entertainment Content will be more necessary for me. 36.68.185.109 (talk) 22:13, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I note that #Requested move 20 March 2019 above was similarly based entirely on official names and primary sources and was then improperly closed, with consensus assessed by the nominator and the move then performed by someone who was involved in the discussion. There was then some cleanup by other parties, but it is still a mess! Please read WP:AT for a start; Unless a case is made based on that there should be no move. And please also read the various closing instructions before closing or actioning a move. TIA Andrewa (talk) 23:32, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/corporate-division
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.


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.

General Entertainment Content[edit]

Relating back to my attempt to move this page to Disney General Entertainment Content, someone has removed the redirect and began developing a page. I'm watching this closely, but right now the only thing there is current units. What do we do in this situation? –Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 17:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If we want a DGE article, we should rename this one, not create a new article. DGE is clearly the Peter Rice's unit, which is what WDTV was/is. I have to admit the new structure is very confusing, though. I still don't know for sure if Walt Disney Television still applies to the whole Peter Rice unit or if it's now just Dana Walden's unit (previously Disney Television Studios and ABC Entertainment). But whatever it is, this article should cover the entire unit run by Peter Rice. There's also confusion over Walt Disney Studios vs Disney Studios Content; and Disney Channels vs Disney Branded Television. — Starforce13 17:34, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Starforce13, That was my whole idea back in November, but it went nowhere. If there's any precedence, Walt Disney Studios is referred to as Disney Studios Content, and ESPN Inc. likewise is known as ESPN and Sports Content. –Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 17:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For now, I would say, all content relating to DGE should be added here and then after a while, we might have more confidence about renaming. They seem to be in an endless restructuring. We'll see where things are when the dust settles.— Starforce13 18:00, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 October 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. per discussion consensus and COMMONNAME. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 00:12, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Walt Disney Television → Disney General Entertainment Content – The section above makes absolute sense. Sure, sources may conflict on this though, but the "Walt Disney Television" of 2020 is now "Disney General Entertainment Content"! Any doubts?! Visit their official website at https://wdtvpress.com for proof!! This has been going on for 18 months now. Intrisit (talk) 09:38, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Piranha249 and Starforce13:, fellow WP ones, it's about time this title got invoked and updated to where we want it to be. A lot of people both in the U.S. and internationally are currently misled by this title when in fact their official website is currently a redirect. I invite you to invoke other Wikipedians to have these updates reflected here. This wiki looks too outdated for my liking. Wikipedia strives for updates, but who will provide them?!?? Intrisit (talk) 09:38, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Partial Support - Both Disney and reliable 3rd party sources have been using "Disney General Entertainment Content" for over a year now. So, we should start using that name as well. EDIT: But, Disney still registered Disney General Entertainment Content, LLC. as a separate entity instead of renaming Walt Disney Television, Inc. So, it's still where the line between the two lies. — Starforce13 17:40, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Partially Support But Walt Disney Television as a division name should be used in parentheses. I also see that 3rd party sources also started referring Walt Disney Studios as Disney Studios Content as of 2020, as this move may be related to my RM here. 36.68.198.229 (talk) 06:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Partial Support - I do agree with @Starforce13 about which registered companies should be which, however. –Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 19:26, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • OpposeMagical Golden Whip (talk) 02:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Any particular reason? Discussion replies are not votes.
    Unrelated - One reply above notes that we should put "Walt Disney Television" in parentheses, typically we only use parentheses for disambiguation, so that would not be ideal. (Sorry for putting this in my reply, didn't want to leave two replies) ASUKITE 15:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Disney has been notified of this discussion. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Notice of article title simplification[edit]

Starforce13, Piranha249, Asukite, Rotideypoc41352 & Shibbolethink: Since the move is completed, I've begun an action to directly direct every wikilink of "Walt Disney Television" across this encyclopaedia to this page which will last until the welcoming of the new year. I'm asking for your opinions on what shall be done about the original production company with that same title which was moved because of disambiguation issues and pageview popularity between 2019 and 2021 whether or not it should be moved back to where it used to be prior to May 2019. Intrisit (talk) 20:47, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Intrisit, actually, hold off before making further updates regarding the rename. There's a very good chance it will revert back to "Walt Disney Television" the way Bob Iger wanted it. The Disney General Entertainment Content was part of Chapek's DMED structure but Iger is killing that and most likely restoring something close to the original structure where this isn't just a content division but a full TV division. We should know in a few weeks. So, to avoid another round of renames and updates, let's hold off until Iger announces the new structure. — Starforce13 22:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, once we know the finalized structure, we'll make a decision at this time. –Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 17:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
UPDATE: Now that the new top segments (Disney Entertainment, ESPN and Parks) have been announced, we should know the new structure in the next few days. The "content" only approach will no longer be the case... and so expect "Disney General Entertainment Content" to definitely be renamed. — Starforce13 23:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:The Walt Disney Company § Disney Entertainment[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Walt Disney Company § Disney Entertainment. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article title[edit]

Just a general comment, but the sources need to match whatever title is selected, and whatever current title being used by Disney should probably be the title unless the scope of the article is being altered in some fashion. The lead should also be adjusted to reflect any title change. Best.4meter4 (talk) 21:24, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Disney_General_Entertainment_Content&oldid=1206982862"