Talk:Fox Kids and Jetix UK

Television Low‑importance

This redirect 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.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This redirect lacks sufficient references and adequate inline citations. Please provide any citations per verifiability and reliable sources.
	A production section needs to be added to this article, or the current one needs to be expanded. This section discusses the "behind the scenes" aspects of the production process, award nominations, and insights into the casting and staffing where possible.
	A response section needs to be added to this article, or the current one needs to be expanded. This section should be well cited using neutral and reliable sources that discuss the reaction of both critics and the viewing audience to the show. Additionally, document any impact the show has had on society, and merchandise that may have resulted from the show, such as toys, games, etc.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this redirect.

Issues with this page[edit]

There may be certain issues with the page, but a complete white wash is not going to happen. Also the page Jetix is not very comprehensive, and it seems every year someone tries and fails to overhaul the pages. The current Disney XD has over six issues with it which is alot for any wiki page. To whitewash soemthing here and redirect users to a page which is in an utter mess, its draft and odd. --Crazyseiko (talk) 19:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have more than six issues with this page. The Jetix page is comprehensive for what I have found as sources for Jetix. It is a basic overhaul. So, the page is overhauled and isn't a failure. I am in process of overhauling Disney XD. It isn't an overnight process. So, you rationalize your fork and utter mess because some one (including yourself) will not improve on what is in the article. Thus overhaul it as we go. That is the point of the Wikipedia, it can be improved upon edit by edit. So, to set up another page with is an utter mess because some other page is an utter mess and just happens to be tagged while your page flies under the radar while need lots more than six clean up tags. Spshu (talk) 14:40, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firslty where are the so called issues tags? You have failed to either put tags on the main page OR even state what the failure are here, Why is that? Also there were a number of points with refs which when blanket disappear. Do you not think this page is not in its best shape? Do you also know I have a list of other pages which also need to be dealt with? You should know yourself it cant all be done at once! You need to add tags AND point what exactly wrong, since it could be different to what I think is wrong. --Crazyseiko (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I don't need to put on the issue tags. Second, I try to deal with one of the issue, which then you throw a tantrum. So, with poor editors like you that don't want to deal with the issue no wonder articles are not cleaned up.

The point being is just because you have this remote article doesn't mean there aren't any issues. Since, that is your "hate" on working on any other article with said tags. I did point out one major problem in the edit summary which you intent to ignore. You are the one claiming with "... it seems every year someone tries and fails to overhaul the pages." You made this a page that now has to be dealt with instead of agreeing to deal with the issue and delay work on other article.

Failures:

Content fork
raw url for sources
needs additional citations for verification
possibly contains original research
facts not supported by sources
Notability not established (separate from Jetix, Fox Kids, or DXD). Spshu (talk) 21:20, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
and excess quote. Spshu (talk) 21:21, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually making sweeping changes without an proper details results in this. You never tried to resolve any of the problems, you just blanket half the page, thats not trying to resolve ANY of the points you included above. I had bring back this WHOLE back a while because some deleted the whole lot? Reason being was everything was merged into a single page cover the whole of EU and USA on Disney XD page, having no details about Fox kids or Jetixs which are the same company so how thats Content fork I dont know. Instead of trying to improve the page you just blanked the lot of the content and suggested nothing appears on a merged page cover once again EU and USA page. http://www.jetixeurope.com/ Has alot of details about the channel ie Reports and press releases.

A good amount of the information could be placed on the ""Disney XD (United Kingdom and Ireland)" but you want to delete that page, but it would be more practically to have everything under one roof, since it was the small channel. to make start we could merge the content will most of it and then work to resolve the page overall taken each section to see whether new refs can be found or its just trivia. I would want some additional Opinions about the so called excess quote. --Crazyseiko (talk) 21:42, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did try to resolve the issue so don't give me "You never tried to resolve any of the problems," just because you don't like the solution. It solves a number of issues.

That is how they handle such issues with channels by break it up by brands. Another is Jetix is not necessarily Disney XD as some Jetix channels became Disney Channel and some Disney XD's were former Toon Disneys. And not all Toon Disneys became either with at least one became Disney Cinemagic. Disney XD is under Disney Channels Worldwide while Jetix was under several companies: ABC Cable Networks (now DCWW), Jetix Europe and Jetix Latin America.

Point to jetixeurope.com as a source shows you don't understand one of the problem, press releases and reports are primary sources and should not be used if it can be avoided as articles are not to rely on primary sources. In research lingo would be considered original research. Continue to add as source would get a tag for depending too much on primary sources. Spshu (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You never did solve such issues, all you did was blanket wipe, that not solving anything. Were talking about UK PAGE, it doesn't page what others did or where it come from etc this is a UK page this is what happened and this is its history. This what happened last time. The whole lot I mean EVERY SINGLE jetix, Disney XD and fox kids pages were wiped clean, along with a lot of history. I never created the new Jexit or Disney XD so people are also not happy. --Crazyseiko (talk) 08:18, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did solve some of the issues. It removes the duplicated information, unsourced information, incorrectly sourced information. You were told in edit summary rmvcontent fork information, rmv. content fork Jetix, Disney XD and rmv. dupl. info Jetix & DXD cover in those articles; see tables. The [Jetix#Magazine|Jetix Magazine]] is not just a UK item and is covered in the Jetix article. Beyond that you are not making much senses what so ever in your last post. Spshu (talk) 13:42, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

you are trying to delete https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_XD_(United_Kingdom_and_Ireland) are you not? which where alot of this information would go.