Needs Help: Creator.Nickelodeon

I'm not entirely sure where to start with this one. I'm reasonably certain it requires a complete and total overhaul.

In the first paragraph, only the first sentence is informative. The time spent describing the logos, which are right there on the page, are unnecessary. The "Green Network" remark is misleading and frankly irrelevant. Nick At Nite hasn't aired dramatic series in some time. The sentence about Nick Jr is alright, I guess.

The second paragraph I'll skip, because it mostly works, though the lack of mention of any sitcoms and the disregarding of the impact of its original animated programming is troubling. This is bare-bones stuff, giving a very small scope, but not as bad as what's to come.

The third paragraph is probably the worst. The accusation of most Nicktoons being rip-offs of CN shows is baseless and accusatory. No arguments to back this up are given. The Made-for-TV Movies and Power Rangers franchise, which are a drop in the bucket in the whole of things, are given a disproportionate amount of focus. In fact, this combined with the previous paragraph could well lead one to think Nick has no hits—hell, no original shows period—at all.

The final paragraph is pretty much entirely about the creation of one show that hasn't even aired yet—which is weird, because iCarly and Victorius have gotten no prior mention. In fact, as mentioned, you'd be hard-pressed to find evidence in the description that Nick airs sitcoms at all. Plus, I'd hardly call cancelling two shows and making one spin-off a "complete overhaul".

So, yeah. In summation, this page needs a serious overhaul, one that focuses less on individual brands, insults, and redundancies and more on the impact and history of the network itself, good and bad. (Look, I'm not against calling Nick a bunch of franchise-mongering rip-off artists, just so long as it's done well.)

edited 12th Aug '12 10:14:28 AM by Wackd

Fixing descriptions, especially when it comes to works and creators, is mainly the kind of thing you're free to do yourself.

I tried. It got reverted. I figured maybe it was too drastic and needed community approval.

I can try to find my old draft and just get it rubber-stamped.

It's better to discuss it first. Who was the reverter, by the way?

The edit, it appears, has been lost to time.

No, it was lost in namespacing. Try this.

It seems to be someone named Ad Man.

There it is!

My old version isn't great, per say, but it's a start and gives a far more coherent picture. Doing it now, I'd probably add more about the nineties and aughts, and name-drop a few of the Long-Runners.

edited 12th Aug '12 11:38:22 AM by Wackd

Sounds like a combination of Complaining About Shows You Don't Watch, Did Not Do The Research, and being a Cartoon Network fan. Better take out all of the bias.

EDIT: Did a change.

edited 12th Aug '12 8:28:04 PM by spacemarine50

Thanks. The main problem now is the disproportionate focus on the Made-for-TV Movies, Power Rangers and Sam And Cat.

edited 13th Aug '12 7:21:40 AM by Wackd

Cut down the focus on made-for-TV films and the Power Rangers franchise. I decided to remove the final paragraph as the cancellation of those two shows seemed completely unnecessary to describe in detail. It would fit better in the iCarly and Victorious pages.

I would just point out that since this is not a trope there isn't a need to bring it to the TRS. You can just start cleaning it up with no problems so long as you try to stay within the basic standards of TV Tropes (ie keeping bias at bay and trying to show some respect to the information that was already there). You can do this with any page that isn't a trope, ie works, actors and networks.

Maybe a good idea to bring it here to avoid an Edit War.

Given that all my edits were reverted last time, yeah, that's what I was going for.

What we have now is a good starting point, but I still feel we could stand to add a bit of info. I'll start taking care of that sooner rather than later.

Some of mine too.

If you are taking out natter or complaining stuff and your edits are getting reverted you should either post something in the page discussion, PM the ones doing it or take it to the moderators.

There isn't any real harm bringing it to TRS, but there is a more proper chain of procedure.

It was a few months back, I had a lot of schoolwork going on. It's only recently I found the page again and decided it needed fixing once more.

I'm not sure if our edits are being undone, or the others' edits are not in such good intentions. I don't think an Edit War is happening right now, but it's close.

As for posting in the discussion page, I think it won't get any attention there.

edited 21st Aug '12 12:46:21 AM by spacemarine50

Wack'd & Antwan you guys reverted two entire paragraphs I wrote because of one minor issue, and then didn't bring it up in the discussion page. I find this TRS thread complaining about the exact issues my now-reverted paragraphs should have solved for you, that being a lack of information about the main current channel. The two paragraphs destroyed were only written in August and contained a summary of the most recent major events on the main channel, that had to do with the most popular shows on the network. Your OP states tat how no-one knows that Nick create shows or do sitcoms but you reverted the paragraph containing information about them!

So now it looks like the only thing Nick does now is air Power Rangers shows. Their Live Action shows are what draw the most ratings and what the channel focuses their advertising and media attention on (not to mention creating stars on the network), but no-one would know based on reading the current page. You really shouldn't make such major reverts without asking first.

Anyway, as for the topic at hand, I would suggest first of all that an overarching current description needs to be there for all the channels that the brand has under it. Right now the first paragraph talks more about the logo than it does about what the channel does!

My first shot here at an 'overhaul' of the first section:

Nickelodeon is a television brand aimed at youth that began in 1979. It is currently owned by Viacom and has several channels under the Nick brand umbrella that target various genres or demographics. When referring to Nickelodeon it may mean the current main channel, or the brand as a whole including the sister channels listed below.

Nickelodeon: is the main channel. It began in 1979 as the first cable TV channel dedicated to youth. It has a wide focus and the shows on the station can be aimed any any age bracket from young children to late teenagers and adults.

Nick Jr: is focused on preschoolers and young children with more educational content. In 2009 it was rebranded to the current name from Noggin to match the existing Nickelodeon brand name system.

Teen Nick: is aimed at teenagers and was launched in 2001.

Nicktoons: is Nickelodeon's animation channel. It was launched in 2002 to compete with Cartoon Network and Toon Disney as well as being a vault channel for Nickelodeon's huge animation library.

Like any network Nickelodeon features a diverse range of programming that includes Live-Action TV, Western Animation and Made-for-TV movies in the Drama, Kid Com, Action Adventure, Science Fiction, Game Show and Reality Show genres.

—

With that established, the article can then start on the history of the main channel. Ditch all the logo stuff, anything to do with the other channels and move from discussing major channel shows from the 80's to the 90's to the 00's to the current status of the channel, ie, the paragraph that including information about the Viacom lockout, ratings issues and cancelling the major shows that have spent the last 5 years as the Nickelodeon cornerstone to proceed with the rebuilding of their primetime line-up.

edited 25th Oct '12 1:23:03 AM by mack

I reverted those paragraphs because they were pure speculation which turned the axing of a few shows into a bizarre plot to overhaul the network, when in fact some of them had been kicked to the side a while back (making cancellation merely a formal measure) and others were being used to form spin-offs (which is pretty par-for-the-course of Dan Schneider.)

As for "cornerstone shows": Six years is a frankly impressive run for a kid's show (I Carly) so that was gonna happen sooner rather than later, and Victorious hasn't been on nearly that long. The rest—-as mentioned—Nick had seemed to kind of forget about anyway. As they do. And given how many characters from iCarly and Victorious are being retained it feels hard to argue that Nick is somehow trying to brush them under the rug.

It also unbalanced the rest of the article by placing undue emphasis on modern shows, namedropping more original programs than the rest of the article combined.

The other networks have their own articles where they're described pretty well, making the structure you suggested redundant.

I do agree, though, that things like the network's original programming and tendency towards creating child stars need to be highlighted better, and the opening paragraph needs to be completely rewritten.

edited 25th Oct '12 1:34:48 AM by Wackd

Can a mod ban someone from editing an article?

A Cartoon Network fan from the looks of it. Do you hate the article?

What exactly is the issue? (The last controversial edit is 24 days ago) Short summary, please.

Dude, the page by and large has stayed fixed and avoided becoming bashy. I think now all that's left to do is increase information on original content.

I'm not sure. It doesn't seem like an Edit War is happening to me at all.

edited 25th Oct '12 2:11:18 PM by Wackd

I think the description of the network takes second place to the fact that it serves as an index of the network's programming. This discussion seems like a lot of fire and brimstone over how complimentary we should be to particular segments of Nick's programming, which is... offputting, to say the least. It's also something that we can and should finish so more important topics can be discussed.

I'm cutting the description down to a basic statement of what it does, who owns it, and its spinoffs and related articles. The meat is the index. I'm also closing the topic.