Talk:Zap2it

Reliability as source

I have observed an editor relying heavily upon citing this website for establishing things like episode titles and debut dates.

Although it is possible that this site could qualify as a source for "when an episode was first televised at a scheduled date in the United States", I don't think we should use it for anything beyond this.

One major problem is that people will cite an "upcoming air date" as if it is the "First Aired", which is wrong. Zap2it may not create an entry until it has a time-based televised airing but that doesn't mean this will be the date they will use as "First Aired", since that may defer to an earlier time.

In fact the 'First Aired' often appears to be earlier in the Episode Guide tab. 184.145.18.50 (talk) 15:17, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

For transparency, I was the one who made the above criticism when I was having trouble logging into my account. Ranze (talk) 07:56, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

For anyone citing this as a reference

I've been annoyed by some things I've seen from people doing this.

Firstly is the appending of the ?aid=zap2it string at the end of a URL. Please take that off. It isn't needed for a link to function, all you need is the number before it. I realize that's added automatically when you visit a page but please take the time to clip it off instead of unexamined copy and pasting.

Secondly is the linking of episode list pages instead of individual episode pages. Please do the latter instead of the former. A problem I'm seeing is misleading "access-date" summaries. People will, at the start of the series, paste the episode overview page and then give a very earlier access-date. Then people will just keep using this same URL to support later episodes without actually updating the access date.

The problem there is that when zap2it initially lists a series, they might for example only list the first 3 episodes and their dates, as only so many are known in advance. But then as people keep adding more and more episodes, it gives the false impression that say, episode 10, had its date and title announced far earlier than it actually was.

I'm going to remove that wherever I see it due to this recurring misuse of citation. Instead, actually link an individual episode page and when you accessed that page, as that may not have been reflected in earlier versions of the overview page.

It's to the point where I'm not going to believe an access-date reflected some later episodes unless someone has copied it to archive.org to show it was there. Archive dates can be checked and are more reliable than access dates. Ranze (talk) 18:29, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Name change to Screener

It appears that Zap2it has changed its name to Screener. We should probably reflect that in the article, however it seems the transition is not complete yet, as TV listings and ratings (TV by the Numbers) are still under the old domain for the time being. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Ah, it's mentioned in the article, I missed that. Might be too early to rename it though, not sure. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:51, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Wait until URL updates; then we can do a mass update. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:27, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to hold off on those updates until the URL is updated for TV listings/ratings anyway. And to be clear, when I said it might be too early to rename I meant some may think so, but I support the move that just happened. nyuszika7h (talk) 14:29, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Examples of unreliability

In cases where there are conflicts of information, while I do see zap2it as useful, it isn't perfect and want to point that out here in cases where it contradicts other sources.

To start off, with the show PJ Masks

• Catboy and the Lunar Dome is listed as episode 25 with an 18 November 2016 premiere
• Owlette of a Kind is listed as episode 26 with a 20 November 2016 premiere

The problem with these as follows:

• Catboy and the Lunar Dome; Gekko and the Rock of All Power was listed as episode 24 with a 21 October 2016 premiere
• Owlette of a Kind; Beat the Drum, Catboy was listed as episode 21 with a 22 April 2016 premiere

Given these examples, we can see that zap2it has a history of including mistakes, duplication, and misleading numbering. While this isn't the norm, it should we shouldn't put absolute faith in what they do and consider that sometimes their claims may be in error.

I don't know if this is due to manual input mistakes or problems with some kind of automated software that doesn't receive competent editor overlook, but we should give priority to more official sources of information when there is a contradiction noticed. Ranze (talk) 03:45, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Zap2it is an official source, and even the best of sources make mistakes. Shouldn't stop using them just because of that fact. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Amaury: could you clarify what you mean by the phrase "official source"? Did you perhaps mean "reliable source" or something? If the latter, then I am presenting examples of mistakes to build an argument that it may not be as reliable a source as some others. Ranze (talk) 07:54, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I meant official source, which Zap2it is. The fact that it makes mistakes sometimes does not make it any less reliable, and many times it will correct itself if there's a scheduling change, for example. Even the greatest of places makes mistakes. Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move (June 15, 2017)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 14:12, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

---

Screener (website) → Zap2It – As of April of this year, Tribune Digital Ventures has dropped the Screener name from the website, and reverted it to the previous Zap2It brand. However, the article title has not changed accordingly. Traditionally, when the name of a product, network, website or company, etc. has changed, the article title is redirected to the new name, with information included in the article to note the name change. TVTonightOKC 13:51, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

• Don't you mean Screener (website)? bd2412 T 15:23, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

fixed. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

• Unsure – From what I've seen, the website still uses the Screener name for news and Zap2It is used for TV listings. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:91CD:2A60:1B87:37CA (talk) 17:17, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Re: 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:91CD:2A60:1B87:37CA – Tribune Digital Ventures discontinued editorial content on the website in late April, and reverted to the Zap2It name thereafter. The news side, under the Screener name, features archived entertainment news content published before the editorial layoffs; the main site, which restored the Zap2It name, now consists only of television listings. TVTonightOKC 16:35, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
• Unsure I'm also unsure about this. From the info you provide TVTonight, to what I looked up, Zap2It is no longer a editorial news organization, simply a television listing site, with TV by the Numbers also still existing. To me, it would seem most appropriate to leave this article as is, and if notable enough, create a new Zap2It article in regards to its TV listings (and noting how it shares the former name of Screener). But I guess in the end, this article should stay at "Screener (website)" because it was the most recent name it had while still being a new organization (in addition to the listings and ratings info). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:56, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. This is exactly the sort of to-and-fro renaming that we do not wish to waste time following. For this reason and others, the official name counts very little according to our article naming policy. So leave as is unless and until there is very strong evidence that the common name has also changed. Andrewa (talk) 11:05, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
  • OK, I think I'm convinced: I basically agree with this – when Screenertv.com actually starts automatically redirecting back to Zap2It.com, then I think we can say that Screener is "dead" and can move the article back to Zap2It at that point. So, oppose for now. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:25, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

This has become rather complicated but in the original nomination [1] Tvtonightokc stated Traditionally, when the name of a product, network, website or company, etc. has changed, the article title is redirected to the new name. I won't mince my words, AFAIK this is pure and absolute rubbish. There is no such tradition, policy, anything. Andrewa (talk) 11:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

---

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.

Requested move 19 October 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Number 57 12:39, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

---

Screener (website) → Zap2It – The reason for this is because six months ago, Tribune Digital Ventures dropped the Screener name from the website, and reverted it back to the previous Zap2It brand. Zap2It is the original name of the website. AdamDeanHall (talk) 21:21, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose by default, because you have provided no reason. {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 23:14, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose move. No change since the previous RM.  ONR  (talk)  04:13, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. I nearly closed this as not moved, but as I opposed the previous RM I could be said to be involved. No case to answer. If someone wants to make a case in terms of wp:AT that might be different. Andrewa (talk) 09:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

---

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.

change in management

As of Jan 2018, the zap2it website TV listings are suddenly quite changed/limited: "new and improved" in frustrating ways etc. This seems to be connected with a change in ownership. Please add info to the article about this apparently consummated change in management.-73.61.15.58 (talk) 00:46, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Zap2it vs Screener

My two cents on an old can of worms:

Screener (website) is not even named in its own article intro.

Screener's url, as given by this article and verifiable by reproducible original research (that is, by visiting the website), is zap2it.com.

My understanding from the article and this talk page is that Zap2it was the original name and Screener has decided to return to that primary branding. This suggests to me that Zap2it is both an official name (see also its url and the header of that website) as well as the most likely common name.

Wikipedia:Article titles#Deciding on an article title recommends Recognizability, Naturalness, Precision, Conciseness, and Consistency (as goals, not as rules). For Conciseness and Precision, does anyone dispute Zap2it is better than Screener (website)? For Recognizability, i've only ever known Zap2it, and was surprised Wikipedia redirected to a website name i'd never heard, but i wouldn't know how to guess how many people recognize the website by the name Screener. Naturally (for Naturalness) i would only search for, link to, or mention anything using the name i know, but i recognize (see what i did there?) others might naturally use other names that they know.

(i don't know that article title Consistency is relevant to this conversation. If a website has a Wikipedia page, the site name is probably typically the best article title, unless a disambiguation is needed. Screener's disambiguation is fine, but Zap2it doesn't need disambiguation. For comparison, the websites that come to mind that need disambiguation include Amazon, Bing, Googol, Hotwire, Outlook, Yahoo; websites that don't need disambiguation include eBay, GeoCities, Hotmail, Lycos, YouTube.)

...Yeah, my two cents. Got change for a five?

--71.121.143.194 (talk) 22:31, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Trivialist has moved this talk page to Talk:Zap2it without moving the corresponding article to Zap2it. I have moved the talk page back, and any future moves should require consensus with a new RM on this talk page. Neither of the 2 previous discussions has a consensus to move the article away from Screener (website). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 18:19, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh, that was weird, I thought I had moved the article. Anyway, why is it still at Screener (website), anyway, when they're clearly using the Zap2it name? Trivialist (talk) 18:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Website URL changed to redirect

As of 25 March 2025, the following are true:

• Zap2it’s URL, tvlistings.zap2it.com, redirects to newsnationnow.com/newsnation-tv-schedule.
• The Zap2it grids are available at tvlistings.gracenote.com/grid-affiliates.html?aid=lat (and no, I can’t make the URL any shorter than that, or it won’t work), without Zap2it branding, or any other company identification.

The change in domain name apparently came without any warning, and was so abrupt that as of this writing, even DuckDuckGo and Google still show Zap2it in their search results.

I don’t know what the current relationship is, if there is one, between Gracenote and Nexstar, which owned Zap2it.

Unfortunately, I gleaned almost all of this through my own research, and cannot find any sources to cite so that I can add the information to the article.

—Quick and Dirty User Account (talk) 04:46, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Gracenote mirror & workaround

1) Little info in Google search. Only this Wiki & isitdownrightnow.com/zap2it.com.html

2) Reddit search is fruitful. But Reddit is approved source in only specific cases???

https://reddit.com/r/kindlefire/comments/1jjwuu5/all_of_a_sudden_all_of_our_tablets_are_going_to_a

or

https://redd.it/1jjwuu5 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:C683:82B0:E109:A57C:ECCD:D32E (talk) 06:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

2a) Says Gracenote is a NEAR-mirror ... something I noticed years ago, too.

https://tvlistings.gracenote.com/grid-affiliates.html?aid=lat

Actually, IME, a shorter URL is https://tvlistings.gracenote.com/grid-affiliates.html

2b) My own original work is you can convert old Zap2it program page URLs / links:

(1) sub "gracenote" for "zap2it"

(2) append "-affiliates" to "overview"

E.g. contrast ISU Grand Prix of Figure Skating program pages:

https://tvlistings.gracenote.com/overview-affiliates.html?programSeriesId=SH05279165

vs

https://tvlistings.zap2it.com/overview.html?programSeriesId=SH05279165

3) The no original work prohibition is a real shortcoming of Wikipedia, esp. in a breaking news situstion like this where information is scarce - but understandable to be rigorous & trustworthy.

I guess this Talk section is helpful for breaking situations like this, to share latest news / info before citable sources appear.

3b) BTW, why is this addition acceptable - without citing a source? Tho I personally would let it stay because one of the rare sources of searchable news (1 of 2 in Google search) ... until a citable source becomes available ....

"On March 25, 2025, Zap2it disappeared from the Internet, with its URL redirecting to the TV schedule for NewsNation" 2601:645:C683:82B0:E109:A57C:ECCD:D32E (talk) 06:39, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the information about the Gracenote listings having existed for some time, and for noting how to convert URLs. Regarding your point 3b, without a proper citation (I don’t think that the one that has been added is adequate), yes, the text should be removed as per WP:V; but personally, I’m choosing not to delete it anyway. We’re just kind of stuck until a reliable source emerges with information about this.—Quick and Dirty User Account (talk) 03:43, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

1) Added a source (down site detector page) to that person's History paragraph (lacking a source) yesterday. Then found a few more since new Google search results re Zap2it stopping popped up ... I added 2 more refs today.

2) See next topic "Removed something" for MORE discussion of Gracenote (probably should be here, too) ...

as justification to allowing my addition of Gracenote to the article. Was removed. But I rewrote, esp. after new sources appeared online since, so I have more (& better?) references now. 2601:645:C683:82B0:4D7A:F99C:46FC:F6A6 (talk) 16:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Removed something

I removed this part because it wasn't very well-sourced and it came across as promotional:

Gracenote TV Listings (https://tvlistings.gracenote.com/grid-affiliates.html?aid=lat) is a near-mirror for Zap2it TV listings, can use Zap2it login (email / password), according to a Reddit post (https://redd.it/1jjwuu5, https://reddit.com/r/kindlefire/comments/1jjwuu5/all_of_a_sudden_all_of_our_tablets_are_going_to_a).

- OpalYosutebito (talk) 10:48, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

tl;dr

Gracenote deserves a mention as it uses the SAME infrastructure as Zap2it (almost identical) & NewsNation TV Schedule, & there are now new sources to cite.

=====

This is a breaking news situation. Earlier, this Wiki was 1 of only 3 Google search results for Zap2it stopping. Now there are more articles - I added 3 sources (BTW ref 1 & 10 are the same - can you consolidate - l'm still learning Wiki markup language).

Many stranded longtime Zap2it users are turning to this Wiki looking for news / info & possible solutions.

Gracenote is a solution (a la other Wiki's that listed successors or alternatives to defunct entitied), not promotional.

I have used Zap2it for over 15 years, when it was owned by Tribune & then NexStar. ALL TV Listing sites are problematic (I often try others), & many chose Zap2it for good reasons.

It has its ups & downs (mostly downward), including frequent bugs. & outages, when I

discovered (even then) YEARS ago that the Gracenote / affiliates domain IS a mirror that I used as a backup when the Zap2it site was down. (Then, the footer said Gracenote, ve now no branding nor footer.)

So, I am not promoting Gracenote, but noting that it is a continuation of Zap2it as a solution for desperate, stranded users that depend on it (e.g. to program / interfsce with media devices).

An analogy is in a Wiki about a certain medicine or a company, it will also mention generics, competitors, sucessors, & improvements.

You can see the anxiety & the reilef in the 3 new sources, when they learn Gracenote is an almost exact replacement a solution.

=====

Gracenote looks almost identical to Zap2it except:

no branding (no mention of name / company)

no footer (Zap2it had company info, links to help & feedback / comment form, etc.)

no channel lineup function (maybe that is a logged on function ... I forgot my Zap2it login, been lurking for years, so can't test that - or the extra features when logged in.)

In fact, A Google search for Zap2it TV Listings brings up Gracenote.

The redirect to the base NewsNation TV Schedule is similar to a (single) channel lineup Zap2it page. I.e. it still uses the same Zap2it infrastructure, but slightly different formatting.

=====

But the most persuasive evidence that all 3 use the SAME infrastructure is ... when pulling up a program page for a title, e.g. NewsNation Live, on the NewsNation TV Schedule ... there are two ways:

lightly click on the title to expand (more info), then

1) click on the now hyperlinked title to bring up a program page on the **NewsNation** domain

https://www.newsnationnow.com/newsnation-tv-schedule

[yeah, I know, SAME as the base URL)

or

2) RIGHT-click on the now hyperlinked title to bring up a program page on the ***Gracenote*** domain!!!

https://tvlistings.gracenote.com/overview-affiliates.html?programSeriesId=SH05101010&tmsId=EP051010100603&from=ssl&aid=lat

[Actually, I could minimalize this link & still work ... I am.almoat an expert on Zap2it).

So ... underneath, even the "new" domain (NewsNation TV Schedule) is TIED into Gracenote!

=====

Now, I don't know the chicken-or-the-egg relationship or licensing, etc. between (Tribune or) NexStar, Zap2it, Gracenote, or Nielsen.

But I know even YEARS ago, I was using Gracenote as an equivalent backup to Zap2it . I & others (IF they know abouf it) will use it now as a replacement ... tho I sorely miss the single channel lineup feature (I may resuscitate my Zap2it login or create a new account to see if that is a feature for registered users). 2601:645:C683:82B0:4D7A:F99C:46FC:F6A6 (talk) 16:23, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I organized the duplicate sources you mentioned under a ref name - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 16:26, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks.

In the future, when I use the same reference twice I will study this to see how you did it.

Embarrassed to say it took me hours to write one paragraph & to add sources to that & someone else's (History) paragraph ... because I am ignorant of the Wikipedia markup language (or even the term / name for latter) ... I have to copy & modify, trial & error.

Why I rarely contribute unless enthused or very timely. & why my earlier edits were quick & dirty (vs all previous were tortured but correct) because I wanted to quickly push out solutions to all the Google searchers that cane here, including in Talk.

BTW, I got spacing between paragraphs in my other Talk topic, but they're cheek & jowl here, today?? 2601:645:C683:82B0:4D7A:F99C:46FC:F6A6 (talk) 16:42, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I definitely understand your struggle. It can take a long time just to write a good sentence, let alone a good paragraph sometimes. I used a script in my common.js to organize the references, so you might need to create an account in order to do that, too... - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 17:12, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I've removed the gracenote stuff from the lead, for several reasons:
1. It included external links, in violation of WP:ELBODY.
2. The lead is supposed to summarize the article body, but gracenote is not mentioned in the body.
3. Most importantly, this all looks like original research. We need a source that says Gracenote uses the same infrastructure as zap2it. Inferring infrastructure based on visual similarity of websites or links is not an acceptable substitute for a source. CodeTalker (talk) 17:07, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Replacement for Zap2it

I added a comment about Gracenote to the History section and the working gracenote URL to the External links section. You can login with your old Zap2it login and it still has all your preferences.

Maybe someone will eventually add this information to the Gracenote article. 75.18.184.32 (talk) 15:57, 28 March 2025 (UTC)