Talk:Big Three (American television)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Austinchristoffersen.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

three

DuMont predates ABC, and is therefore the third TV network. ABC was #4, and thus was the first successful 4... see the DuMont article. 132.205.44.134 05:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The CW and MyNetworkTV

Do these networks seriously provide enough competition to the "big three" to warrant mentioning? TerraFrost 12:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

This all seems rather dated

Fox is entering it's third decade of existence, it's been the top rated network in the country for large swathes of the past decade. I think this article is too historical in it's outlook, considering "Major Television Network" is a re-direct. Maybe it's time to change the scope and title of this article to reflect the current situation in the US? --MichiganCharms (talk) 01:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Fox was entering the third decade of its existence before this article was written. There's no such thing as an article being "too historical" when we're talking about a topic covering a historic period in U.S. broadcasting.

I don't think Major Television Network should be a redirect here, though: It's too U.S.-centric, and as you correctly state, it's not a current concept. That should be rectified. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with this article from a purely historical perspective (though it lacks the postscript of Fox eventually becoming the most watched network and the emergence of UPN/WB/CW with some hit shows over the years) but I do think the redirect needs to be removed... I found this article by clicking it and was kind of surprised. --MichiganCharms (talk) 07:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/01/13/2014-2015-season-nbc-leads-among-adults-18-49-cbs-tops-total-viewers-through-week-16-ending-january-11-2015/349490/

SOS the Big 3 and the Little 2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.12.72.225 (talk) 15:21, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Naming

So I see that the page was previously named Big Three (television networks), but got moved to Big Three TV Networks, ostensibly to "cut down the verbiage, and also eliminate any disambiguations." On the one hand I can see the reasoning behind it, as "(television networks)" does seem like quite a mouthful for a disambiguation, but on the other hand, it strikes me as making it appear that the collective subject of the article are strictly described as "Big Three TV Networks", which doesn't seem to be the case, they're referred to as the "Big Three". Plus, there's the issue that the move appears to have been done unilaterally, which I don't know if in this case was the most adequate step.--EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 10:58, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

@EdgarCabreraFariña: I know I'm a bit late here, but I agree; I suggest that the page should be returned to "Big Three (television networks)", or "Big Three (television)" if that would be more concise. The current title implies a proper name due to capitalization that simply does not exist. Also, leaving a disambiguator in parentheses makes it easier to write wikilinks in markup (see Help:Pipe trick). Pinging Vjmlhds to see why the move happened and if we can revert it. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

As I said, it was to make it leaner, meaner, and clearer. I think I have an idea to get everybody some of what they want. Vjmlhds (talk) 11:50, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I think we need to stop moving the page without discussion. The new title of "Big Three (U.S. TV)" is a violation of usual naming conventions, which encourage "American" over "U.S." (see this RfC). I also think we use "television" over "TV" in titles in all cases except the disambiguator "(TV series)" – for instance, "Drama (film and television)" instead of "Drama (film and TV)", "Rachel Lindsay (television personality)" instead of "Rachel Lindsay (TV personality)", "List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series" instead of "List of Marvel Cinematic Universe TV series", "Cable television" instead of "Cable TV", etc.

I propose moving the article to "Big Three (television)", as there is no indication of a similar Big Three outside the United States. This time, let's establish consensus before making a move. RunningTiger123 (talk) 14:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

It seems that someone else has moved the article to "Big Three (American television)", which I think is a good solution. Assuming nobody else responds here, I guess the matter is closed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn’t it be Big 4 instead?

I was just wondering, shouldn’t it be Big 4? Because the Fox Broadcasting Company is essentially a competitor to ABC, CBS and NBC, and the FCC lists it as one of the big 4 American Broadcast Television Networks

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/fccs-review-broadcast-ownership-rules

I’m just a bit confused is all. I’m not very well versed in American Broadcasting standards but if the FCC labels it as a Major American Broadcast Television Network, shouldn’t it be added with the other 3 and this section become the Big 4? MetaPlanet (talk) 20:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 16 May 2024

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 to Big Three (American television). (closed by non-admin page mover) SilverLocust 💬 07:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

---

American major traditional television networks → ? – This page has been recently moved a bit, without any explanation or reason, from its original stable title, Big Three (American television). I assume it was because the name "Big Three" is more or less an informal term, and therefore the original page mover wanted to have a more descriptive title instead. I tried to make it less ambiguous and subjective. The subjective part in my disagreement in one of the page moves was in regards to the Fox Broadcasting Company, and whether it should also be considered "major" while the other three networks are more "major traditional". But instead of possibly getting into another move war, I'm opening this RM to the community for suggestions. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 20:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 22:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Maybe we should move it to American Major TV Networks instead?

Merv MatTalk 15:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

• In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with Big Three (American television). If you have access to JSTOR or ProQuest (possibly through WP:TWL), look up "'big three' 'nbc' 'abc' 'cbs'" or something similar, and you'll find plenty of references that use that terminology (open-access example). I considered Network television in the United States to match Cable television in the United States, but topics such as a fourth television network, the network era, and smaller networks are covered elsewhere and a new overview article would be more suitable for that title. @Merv Mat: can you offer a justification for the move? As noted as your talk page, there should be consensus for a page move and it's hard to establish that when no rationale is offered. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:01, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Television/Television stations task force and WikiProject Television have been notified of this discussion. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

• Move to either Big Three (American television) or Big Four (American television). It may be informal, but it is used in a lot of literature, including scholarly literature. The nomenclature even leaks into things like contracts. We have plenty of articles on similarly informal but commonly remarked "Big Three", "Big Four", etc., such as Big Four accounting firms, Big Four (banking), Big Three (Peru), Big Three (automobile manufacturers). Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Reverse move No opinion on the Big Three/Big Four matter, but the new title is vague and obfuscates what the article's subject is about, while Big Three (American television) spells it out perfectly. Stop moving pages (without notification) for the sake of busy work; the editor needs to work more in article space before moving another page. Nate • (chatter) 00:28, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Comment — WP:AT is a policy. A policy, as opposed to a guideline or an essay, is supposed to be given greater weight by editors. The policy strongly suggests that parenthetical disambiguation is intended to be a last resort, not a first resort. Also as opposed to a guideline or an essay, a policy is policy because a lot more thought and discussion went into establishing it. It's disrespectful to that process to subvert policy through local consensus. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 06:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Heads Up. This page was moved earlier today to Big Five (American Television) [1]. It's since been reverted. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 01:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  Closer, I reverted the move mostly as a procedural matter—this discussion is still open and was just relisted—and partially because I saw no consensus to move to a Big Five title. I myself have not an opinion on the title because I haven't looked at the sources, data, etc. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:52, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  I currently oppose renaming to Big Five (American Television), unless it is determined that the "Big Five" phrase is also commonly used by other reliable sources, and there is consensus to widen the general scope of the article from the historical "Big Three". Zzyzx11 (talk) 13:55, 24 May 2024 (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.