Talk:Warner Bros. Discovery

Continue to operated as the new company formed

Does WarnerMedia and Discovery, Inc. continues to operate after Warner Bros. Discovery formed. Is anyone can explained about that matter?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.187.226.166 (talk) 12:01, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

No.... AdhiOK (talk) 12:08, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

AdhiOK is correct; upon the merger of WarnerMedia & Discovery, the assets of both companies would continue to be run by Warner Bros. Discovery. After the merger, WarnerMedia & Discovery would cease to exist, having been replaced by Warner Bros. Discovery. 2600:1700:C960:2270:CCE4:C6A3:9BEA:E12 (talk) 23:06, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Date confusion

The date listed on this page hasn't been shown to accurate since a redesigned website and social media accounts haven't changed over to the new name. Should the date be changed to April 2022? Paramount1106 (talk) 21:17, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• What date? If you're referring to April 8, 2022, the date of the merger, then no. The merger date is reliably sourced, and social media accounts not being merged tells nothing about whether the companies merged. Bsoyka (talk) 19:11, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
• Not clear to me, either. Could you please better explain the change you would like to do? P1221 (talk) 07:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

The situation with WBD's ownership...

Should the current ownership situation with Warner Bros. Discovery (AT&T shareholders hold 71% & Discovery, Inc. shareholders hold 29%) be mentioned in the infobox, seeing as how multiple news outlets have already reported on WBD's ownership? 2600:1700:C960:2270:7C59:F8:BDDE:5619 (talk) 02:18, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

For what it's worth, it looks like someone has done so. Bsoyka (talk) 19:57, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Warner Bros Discovery Logo.svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

For those coming in to see this: The deletion rationale was deemed insufficient, so it is no longer there CreecregofLife (talk) 06:24, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Warner Bros Discovery Logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2022

Can you add TNT Sports (Argentina, Brazil and Chile) to Warner Bros Discovery / assets please? Catherine Carter Rhonda Carter (talk) 18:34, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Bad url.

Hi. This change have the bad URL in the comment of the change. Right is Kreheľ, not Krehe?. ✍️ Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 18:45, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2022 (2)

In the assets section, shouldn't Cinemax be put under HBO, since Cinemax is considered a complementary channel service to HBO? 2600:1700:C960:2270:B519:7D26:12D4:F293 (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, according to Cinemax's own article on here, it's owned by Home Box Office, Inc. (also the parent of HBO), and, to quote Cinemax's article, it was launched as "a companion "maxi-pay" service complementing the offerings shown on parent network Home Box Office (HBO)". Also, from 1) an article on the website for Paste Magazine: "What began as a pay cable network focusing solely on movies that could complement HBO’s programming,...."; 2) an article from the New York Times: "Figuring better theirs than a competitor, HBO set up a second service, and now when Cinemax's program schedule is put together it is with knowledge of what HBO is doing"; & 3) a quotation, courtesy of Google Books, from a book, called Inside the Rise of HBO: A Personal History of the Company That Transformed ...: "An incisive analysis of what had gone wrong with Take 2 laid the groundwork for a better-designed, more effectively complementary service: Cinemax, which launched in 1980."

Let me know if you need anymore sources that state Cinemax as a compelemtary service to HBO. 2600:1700:C960:2270:B519:7D26:12D4:F293 (talk) 03:22, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Is this really necessary?

I don't know about you, but this page has one really huge asset list, which I see as a little bit problematic as we already have a compromised asset list, as this list of assets on the main page is growing too long, taking up a good portion of it, and I am, in my honest opinion, don't think that part of the page is benefactial. To better understand the Asset list that's taking up a lot of the page, here's what I'm taking about:

Assets

• 9Rush (joint venture)
• ACME Night
• Adult Swim
• All3Media (50%)
• Alloy Entertainment
• American Heroes Channel
• Animal Planet
• Asian Food Network
• AT&T SportsNet
• Avalanche Software
• Bleacher Report
• Boing
• Boomerang
• Bravo New Zealand (joint venture)
• The Burbank Studios (beginning in 2023)
• Cartoon Network
• Cartoon Network Studios
• Cartoonito
• Cinemax
• CNN
• CNN International
• CNN+
• Cooking Channel (69%)
• Destination America
• Digital Studios Group
• Discovery+
• Discovery Canada
• Discovery Channel
• Discovery Digital Studios
• Discovery Familia
• Discovery Family Channel (60%)
• Discovery Home & Health
• Discovery Kids India
• Discovery Kids Latin America
• Discovery Kids
• Discovery Kids Media
• Discovery Life Channel
• Discovery Networks International
• Discovery Networks Sweden
• Discovery Norway
• Discovery Turbo
• Discovery Studios
• DMAX
• Dplay Norway
• DTX
• Eden
• Ellen Digital Ventures (joint venture)
• Eurosport 1
• Eurosport 2
• Eurosport
• Eyeworks
• Fandango Media (30%)
• Fatafeat
• Food Network (69%)
• Frisbee
• Giallo
• Glitz
• Golf Digest
• GolfTV
• Golf World
• Group Nine Media
• Hanna-Barbera Studios Europe
• HBO Max
• HGTV
• HLN
• Hogar de HGTV
• Home Box Office, Inc.
  • HBO
  • HBO Asia
  • HBO Europe
  • HBO Films
• HTV
• Investigation Discovery
• I.Sat
• IStreamPlanet
• K2
• Lazytown Entertainment
• Living
• Magnolia Network (majority stake)
• MallTV
• MONDO TV
• Monolith Productions
• Motor Trend (50%)
• Motor Trend Group
• MuchMusic Latin America
• NetherRealm Studios
• Newshub
• Oh!K
• Ole Distribution (joint venture)
• Otter Media
  • Rooster Teeth
• OWN (95%)
• Philo (joint venture)
• Pogo
• PopSugar Studios
• Portkey Games
• Quest Red
• Quest
• Rachael Ray Entertainment
• Real Time Italy
• Really
• Ricochet
• Renegade Pictures
• Rotten Tomatoes (25%)
• Rush
• Rocksteady Studios
• Science Channel
• Space
• TABI Channel
• TBS
• Tele 5
• Telepictures Productions
  • A Very Good Production (joint venture)
• The CW (50%)
  • The CW Plus
  • CW Seed
• The Wolper Organization
• Three
• TLC
• Toonami
• Tooncast
• TNT Series
• TNT Sports
  • TNT Sports Argentina
  • TNT Sports Brazil
  • TNT Sports Chile
• TNT
• Travel Channel
• TravelChannel.com
• TruTV
• Turner Broadcasting System
• Turner Classic Movies
• Turner Entertainment Co.
• Turner Sports
• TT Games
• TVN Group
  • Player
• TVNorge
• Twenty Twenty
• Vox Media (minority stake)
• Vudu (25%)
• Wall to Wall Media
• Warner Bros.
  • DC Entertainment
    • DC Comics
    • Mad Magazine
  • Warner Bros. Pictures Group
    • Castle Rock Entertainment
    • New Line Cinema
    • Warner Bros. Pictures
      • DC Films
      • Warner Animation Group
  • Warner Bros. Museum
  • Warner Bros. Ranch (until 2023)
  • Warner Bros. Studios, Burbank
  • Warner Bros. Studios, Leavesden
  • Warner Bros. Animation
  • Warner Bros. Home Entertainment
    • Studio Distribution Services (50%)
    • Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment
  • Warner Bros. Television Group
    • Warner Bros. Television
    • Warner Bros. Domestic Television Distribution
    • Warner Bros. Worldwide Television Distribution
  • WaterTower Music
  • Wizarding World
• WarnerMedia
• WarnerMedia Distribution
• WarnerMedia International
• WarnerTV Comedy
• WarnerTV Film
• WarnerTV France (joint venture)
• WarnerTV Serie
• Warner TV
• Williams Street
• World Heritage Channel
• Yalli Productions

With that, I'd just like your opinion wheter or not this asset list is worth keeping on the Warner Bros. Discovery page or not, seeing as this has gone a little bit out of hand since the introduction of the list of assets page. BiggieSMLZ (talk) 21:05, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

we can do something what the disney page has going for them. helps shorten the list down to certain assets such as Warner bros entertainment and Turner Broadcasting system. CB (talk) 22:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Good idea. However, Turner Broadcasting was apparently dissolved as a business unit back in 2019, so it may be necessary to have its core assets on the list. BiggieSMLZ (talk) 04:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Actually, you're half right on the Turner Broadcasting thing; according to the article for Turner, while it was dissolved as a legal entity following AT&T's acquisition of Time Warner back in2018, as of 2020, (paraphrasing here) "AT&T reports the financial results for the former WarnerMedia's (now Warner Bros. Discovery's) ad-supported cable networks under the Turner business unit". So, in a way, Turner does still exist, just not as an actual separate brand anymore.

Oh, and I whole-heartedly agree with taking a page from the playbook of the Disney article, as far as giving a basic outline of Warner Bros. Discovery's divisions in this article. If anything, leave the more comprehensive asset listing on a page meant to hold a more comprehensive listing of the company's assets. 2600:1700:C960:2270:8C47:9AE3:7643:D12C (talk) 05:48, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2022

Change Warner Bros. Discovery's stock ticker symbol from "WBD" to "WBDWV", as that's what it actually is. Changing it to "WBD" doesn't bring up the company's stock on a stock ticker symbol look-up. 2600:1700:C960:2270:8C70:EDF0:E5A6:42BD (talk) 19:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

We have it reliably sourced CreecregofLife (talk) 20:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

But, for now, clicking on the link for WBD's stock ticker symbol "WBD" in the infobox brings up a page on Nasdaq's website that has the message "WBD is an unknown symbol.", which means WBD isn't trading under that symbol yet. 2600:1700:C960:2270:8C70:EDF0:E5A6:42BD (talk) 22:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Or the site hasn't updated CreecregofLife (talk) 23:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

The logo is WRONG

The word "Discovery" is too far to the left than the actual logo RealSonny (talk) 01:14, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I checked the WBD website, it is the correct one. Quetstar (talk) 01:15, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Adding on to above: the W and the D line up on the left, both here and on the website. If you click on the logo in the article, you can see the grid from the transparent background which should help show this. Bsoyka (talk) 01:36, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Alternate Warner Bros. Discovery logo...

So, as it turns out, there's an alternate Warner Bros. Discovery logo that's been making the rounds; one that's got the "WB" shield above the lettering & "Warner Bros. Discovery" centered below the "WB" shield. Here's a link to an article displaying the alternate logo: [1]. Should the alternate logo be included in the article? 2600:1700:C960:2270:8C70:EDF0:E5A6:42BD (talk) 02:15, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

We need to stick with one or the other as we're using the logo under a claim of fair-use, so we need to keep it minimal. I think the current one should stay, as we actually have a high-quality SVG for that one. Bsoyka (talk) 02:22, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't saying anything about replacing the current WBD logo in the article with the alternate one from the TechCrunch website; I was simply asking if that alternate WDB logo from TechCrunch should be included in the article. 2600:1700:C960:2270:8C70:EDF0:E5A6:42BD (talk) 02:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

That's what I'm saying though, we shouldn't just add another. See Wikipedia:Non-free content § Meeting the minimal usage criterion. Plus, I'm not sure what understanding for the reader would be added by including a second version of almost exactly the same logo. Bsoyka (talk) 02:42, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

That's literally the same logo, just rearranged. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:16, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Merge Discovery Inc article into Warner Bros. Discovery article, it is the same company

Discovery Inc and Warner Bros. Discovery is the same company/business entity, Discovery Inc acquired WarnerMedia from AT&T Inc and renamed itself Warner Bros. Discovery after it acquired WarnerMedia from AT&T Inc. Here's the link about Discovery Inc being renamed to Warner Bros. Discovery: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, WASHINGTON, DC 20549, FORM 8-K, CURRENT REPORT, Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc.

Granthew (talk) 03:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: WarnerMedia and Discovery, Inc. are predecessors to Warner Bros. Discovery. That doesn't make them all the same company in terms of history. For example, when a new U.S. President comes along, the old one doesn't just become the same human being as the new one. Sure, they share a job title, but that doesn't make their entire lives the same. All three of these subjects are/were separate companies with separate histories that should be detailed in separate articles.

In addition, note that the company legally changing names doesn't necessarily require us to merge articles here. (Note that your link isn't loading for me.) Bsoyka (talk) 03:58, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Not surprised my suggestion with a reference is opposed. The U.S. President example doesn't make sense. Granthew (talk) 04:10, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: Why are you just choosing Discovery and not including WarnerMedia in your proposal? This is why: Being a merger of the two companies would mean merging two previously parallel histories into one. That would be absolute hell to configure on a single Wikipedia page. The UPN and WB pages also exist despite merging into The CW 15+ years ago. Heck, even recently, despite Funimation merging into Crunchyroll, it was found best to keep it its own page and not move it to one with the Crunchyroll branding CreecregofLife (talk) 04:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

If you look at my reference, you would see the reason for this discussion, it seems you indicated that you didn't look at my reference, does anyone still look at references/sources? Granthew (talk) 04:14, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

You're not listening. Don't bludgeon. CreecregofLife (talk) 04:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

I’m just choosing Discovery cause Discovery and Warner Bros. Discovery are the same company while WarnerMedia is a business enterprise that was acquired by Discovery and after acquiring WarnerMedia, Discovery renamed itself Warner Bros. Discovery. Why are you not looking at my source, can you please look at my source, that’s all I ask. UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, WASHINGTON, DC 20549, FORM 8-K, CURRENT REPORT, Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc.

I think UPN and WB was merged into CW, thus not merging either WB or UPN into the CW article, I’ll look this up further. Why would you merge Funimation into Crunchyroll if they are different companies, that’s not a good example. Granthew (talk) 05:16, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Opinion: My first response was to oppose the merger of the articles for Discovery & Warner Bros. Discovery, as they aren't the same company, much in the same way that WarnerMedia & Warner Bros. Discovery aren't the same company. I mean, Wikipedia hasn't merged the articles for CBS Corporation & Viacom into ViacomCBS/Paramount Global.

But, then again, I did some research, and it turns out the information for Warner Communications (one of two Time Warner pre-merger companies; the other is Time, Inc.) is a section in the WarnerMedia article, just like how the information for Price Waterhouse & Coopers & Lybrand (the two PricewaterhouseCoopers pre-merger companies) is a section in the PricewaterhouseCoopers article. So, I'm half & half on this. 2600:1700:C960:2270:4843:3224:571C:C996 (talk) 04:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The old Viacom/second CBS Corp/ViacomCBS/Paramount Global is the same company and I have stated that on the Paramount Global talk page but can't get traction on that discussion. Talk:Paramount_Global#ViacomCBS_is_not_a_new_company,_it’s_actually_the_original_Viacom. Granthew (talk) 04:27, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: The three companies have distinct histories and structures. Having just one article will only cause confusion. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:19, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

No, there will be two articles, one for WarnerMedia and one for Discovery/Warner Bros. Discovery. I said merge Discovery Inc into Warner Bros. Discovery. I did not say merge WarnerMedia and Discovery Inc into Warner Bros. Discovery, I only said merge Discovery, Inc into Warner Bros. Discovery, WarnerMedia continues its own article. Granthew (talk) 04:35, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The Discovery rename is merely a legal process. It is usually described as a merger between the two rather than an outright acquisition. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:37, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Well Discovery and Warner Bros. Discovery is the same business enterprise while WarnerMedia is not, thus WarnerMedia stays as a separate article. Granthew (talk) 05:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)