Jump to content

Talk:TNT Sports 4

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

Speculation

[edit]

This article is bordering on pure speculation or original research. It's tone is questionable for an encyclopedia. No reference validates any of the assumptions. And I'm not entirely certain it meets notability requirements. The channel has been sort of 'announced', but even ESPN hasn't been clear on the implementation. There's been a deal struck with Sky, but I don't think that meets notability. It's tempting to suggest this article for deletion. It's only my own personal interest in the existence of this channel (I'd really like to see it come into being) that prevents me from listing it as an AFd. Anyway, I'm going to tag it up a bit. --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 11:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Franks (Lynne Franks, the ESPN executive who brokered the Premier League deal) said the new ESPN channel, which will run alongside its existing UK channels, ESPN Classic and ESPN America, will be available on every platform, including cable, satellite and Freeview. [1] Even if the channel was combined with ESPN America, this page would be needed as it would be separate from the European version. I don't see how 17 references (15 at the time of your comment) amounts to the entire article being original research or where an editor has inserted their own opinions or analysis. - Jasmeet_181 (talk) 08:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just because somebody has references to speculation, doesn't mean it isn't speculation. There is only a statement by ESPN, that they will do something, find some way, to broadcast those premiership games. Nobody knows what how they will, very possibly not even ESPN at this point. Yet this page is written as if the channel exists! Have you read this? The article itself can't even nail down for certain what its own topic is going to be. It actually refutes your Franks reference, which is specific, with its uncertainty. The only reason I'm not doing anything more about it than complain here, is that I'm rather excited about the possible expansion of ESPN channels here into the UK, and have a personal vested interest (I was/is(?) a subscriber to ESPNAmerica for my college sports needs. Could care less about Sentanta). I really want to see this happen. --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And on a side note, I think this Wikipedia craze for references is vast overkill. They have a natural necessary place in any factual article, no doubt. But there are more references here than sentences! Have you ever seen the Amazon.com article? Ok off my soapbox. --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 09:41, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On Freeview

[edit]

It has Sky Digital and Virgin Media as platforms but not Freeview?! (86.1.97.190 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 12:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Freeview is a brand used to promote free digital terrestrial television services, ESPN is a pay subscription channel. No agreements have been made public between any of the pay tv platforms that use DTT and ESPN for the ESPN channel, only ESPN America. This is covered in the article. - Jasmeet_181 (talk) 17:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update and possible merger/delete

[edit]

Well, ESPN has finally announced officially their plans to rebrand ESPN America and use that channel to broadcast the premiership games. So the question is, at some point, should this page be somehow merged into ESPN America, or should it be deleted and the ESPN America page updated to reflect its new branding and broadcasting? Logically, it looks me that we should simply update the ESPN America page with the new details. This was done already in the past when it was rebranded from NASN. It would seem a natural course of action. In any case, it makes no sense to have two pages on the exact same channel. --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 07:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The ESPN America page covers a pan European channel that will continue to exist, just not in the UK. ESPN (UK) is a "replacement" with a different brand and different programming so it has a different page, whereas NASN was a rebrand with the same programming. According to the Guardian, ESPN America could return at a later date as a separate UK channel in another EPG slot. Clearly then it isn't the same channel. - Jasmeet_181 (talk) 17:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In that case then, this should remain a separate page in my opinion. --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 11:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
New update. Looks like ESPN America will stay the same in the UK, although on a different channel, and a channel simply called ESPN will do the premiership games. This is good news ofcourse as it means that college sports won't be sacrificed for European soccer. --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 15:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ddkgeutw3woyr3itr8t 197.185.110.74 (talk) 08:48, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Boxing

[edit]

Whoever keeps deleting the section on boxing please stop it. I have provided multiple references and there is no need to remove something just because you don't agree with it. Wikipedia is for everyone, not just a select few who try to pick and chose what they want in an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.105.249 (talk • contribs) 15:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC) [reply]

First of all according to one of your own references, "ESPN are showing boxing" [2], there is also a boxing category on the ESPN websites schedule. Secondly, stop adding links to forums such as East Side Boxing Forum, it is not an acceptable source of information as noted in WP:SPS. Lastly you have not backed up your claim that boxing has a large fanbase in the UK, it is your opinion, stick to a neutral point of view. - Jasmeet_181 (talk) 16:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just search ESPN in the threads. It's a genuine criticism AND I originally stated there is no commitment to 'LIVE' boxing coverage. If anyone is being biased, it is you, sir. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.105.249 (talk) 17:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on BT Sport ESPN. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:26, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on BT Sport ESPN. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 07:57, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to ESPN UK

[edit]

This page is useless for TNT Sports 4. It should either be changed to a history of what was ESPN UK or just be deleted. Nigelnu (talk) 22:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that turning this into an article about what was ESPN UK would now be the thing to do with this article, and such an article should also probably include the time when it was called BT Sport ESPN.Rillington (talk) 03:08, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:TNT_Sports_4&oldid=1263024643"