Wikipedia

Talk:XM Satellite Radio channel history

Latest comment: 8 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Order Of Deleted Channels

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As it stands right now, I don't think the deleted channel list is in chronological order. I could be wrong, but I don't think so. If the rest of the lists aren't in chronological order, they should be changed also. Flap Jackson 01:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Micro-Channels

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Should all the items in this section except for "Earth Sounds" be removed due to the fact that they're in the XM Live article? I mean the XM Live events were really XM Live, but "Earth Sounds" was it's own seperate channel. Flap Jackson 02:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Channels before the change

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Who the hell altered the channel information before the change (i.e. Holiday channels?)

Way to preserve history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.236.143 (talk) 19:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Chrome: A merger or Deletion then Rebirth?

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion

For the past few days, an edit war has been happening with me and a person who does not a account. He sates that Chrome was merge with The Strobe no matter the date. I differ stating that the format was dead for two months before it came back thus not being a merge and just a returned format under one name. I feel that if it wasn't for outrage, there would be no Disco format thus this is just a format return rather than a pre-planned merge of channels.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this issue? TravKoolBreeze (talk) 02:23, 19 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

The category description is "These channels were merged with their Sirius counterpart to reduce redundancies across the two channel lineups." That is what occurred with Chrome and The Strobe. Travis argues that Chrome is ineligible for the category because the format was first removed entirely and then returned 60 days later. The description of the category, however, makes no reference to time; it is a category that simply documents channels/formats that once existed on each service prior to the merger as separate entities but that after the merger were consolidated into one channel. Chrome meets that standard. Further, all channels listed in the category are shown as being "replaced." That language has not been challenged; Chrome meets that standard also. Many channels listed were not actually merged, they were replaced entirely. If these channels are listed then Chrome should remain also. (See Travis's remark above: "just a returned format under one name." Many channels listed meet the standard of a surviving format under one name.)
Travis suggests that an additional qualification for the category is that a channel must be "a pre-planned merge of channels." But the category has never contained such a requirement in its premise; the category is straightforward in its purpose and description.
The primary point that Travis raises is his argument of chronology. That issue, however, is not relevant to the category. The list is of chanhenels that were merged (or even replaced entirely) and Chrome should remain as an appropriate entry.
20:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
For a channel to be merged, there must be two channels at the time for them to merge into one. Chrome and The Rhyme as well as Strobe & Backspin was did not exist when the "merge" happen. When I created the category, those channels all exisited when merged into one. Even with Open Road and Road Dog Trucking, two went into one. A merge is not 0 into 1.
There is no pre-planned merge of channels but there must be two channels at the time. So if you want to say that is pre-planned, then it is.
Chronology does not matter. The fact that there is two channels to be merged into one does. Even the definition merge is to cause to combine or coalesce; unite. There is no uniting when there is nothing there to begin with.
TravKoolBreeze (talk) 02:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC}
Travis, the premise of your latest statement is silly. Your entire position throughout this childish spat (refer to your repeated comments in your article edits) has been based on chronology - with the "pre-planned" concept added above - and now you claim both are irrelevant. Your logic appears to be that Chrome and The Strobe never existed.
The category was made necessary by the Sirius XM merger. The fact that the two channels under discussion existed before the merger and that the format continues with one channel for the purpose of "reduc[ing] redundancies across the two channel lineups" clearly has resulted in a merge (or a replacement, per the categories other listings). Your latest position is consistent with mine: "chronology does not matter." I understand your obsession with the manner in which the merge occurred but it remains irrelevant. Sirius XM offers one channel of disco/classic dance, merged or replaced (both qualify for the category, take your pick) with the other due to redundancy caused directly by the consolidation of the two companies. This is so simple, a caveman could do it.
14:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.159.225 (talk)
Sir, you may think it is silly; however, there has been no thought of date of the channel merger. To count as a merger, there must have gone from 2 to 1 and not 0 to 1. For 63 days, Disco and Classic Hip-hop, which I am of a fan of, did not exist and be it not for subscriber outrage, it would continue not to exist.
I do agree that there was two channels before the merger and there is one now currently. However, the fact that the method for which only one channel for each format remains does matter. Both formats were dead and SirusXM was planning to move on for at least a month without bringing them back. Replaced and merged, in your wording is the same; however, when I came up with the section, the idea was that two must go into one. I still see that both formats was reborn and thus does not count as being merged.
Insulting my position does not makes yours look better. We both have made our point and it is up to other editors to see and write their thoughts.
TravKoolBreeze (talk) 17:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Travis:
"there has been no thought of date of the channel merger": Please clarify this statement, it is unclear. If you are claiming that, "chronology does not matter," which appears to be your intention, then your logic is flawed and contradictory to your argument as discussed above.
"To count as a merger, there must have gone from 2 to 1": Chrome and The Strobe were two channels. Now there is one. Simple math, Travis.
"be it not for subscriber outrage": Irrelevant, as demonstrated above.
"Replaced and merged, in your wording is the same": You have misread what was written. The category, not I, treats them as the same. For example, XM's Vox was replaced with Sirius's Metropolitan Opera channel. There was no merging, Vox was completely replaced yet this channel is in the category. "Replaced" is the word which the category itself uses for each channel listing. If you created the category then you are likely responsible for its use, which, according to your position, is unacceptable.
I think an issue here may be your use and comprehension of the English language. Your grammar and spelling contain consistent errors and, I suggest, a failure to properly comprehend concepts.
And it is best not to assume I am a "sir."
21:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.159.225 (talk)
Sir or Madam, since I have no idea who you are, have no reason to insult my point; it does not help your logic when others will read this. Subscriber outrage is relevant as it affected the formats to come back. Chrome and the Strobe were two channels, both of which were deleted and it was because of the outrage, as mentioned in the SiriusXM press release, that the format was brought back. Thus it was 2 to 0 to 1, thus there was no uniting, no replacing, no merger. All that was done was creation. It seems that you skip this key point in your argument. Chronology thus does not matter, since the idea of the day when Chrome would be merger would not matter since there was never a merge.
In the point of your discussion, the way in which you use replace and merge are one in the same. Even in the example you have given, you have once again stated the point. I am responsible for the way that it was you but you have taken it to both mean the same. It the matter to save time, i used replace with all of them. Some of the channels may have Sirius names but are more XM like, such as Spa and Road Dog Trucking. And then some were merge in themselves such as Pok2k. Thus replace does not equal merge and the two are just separate terms.
TravKoolBreeze (talk) 22:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
*crickets*
16:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.159.225 (talk)
They could have called it "Mirror Ball" for all we know -- there were not any plans to return to that format after the merger, at least until an outcry from the masses encouraged them to bring it back. Based on the information that SiriusXM provided, while there were other channels that did merge, I would say that in this case, this is a brand new channel with an old name. --mhking (talk) 23:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
One editor has cared to comment on this and it took two weeks after your call to wait for additional comment for that to occur. Your threat wrt blocking is not appreciated and is inappropriate. A well-documented record has been created above and in the edit comments about the inaccuracy. Please cease your threats.
03:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.159.225 (talk)
Please, do not use the talk page page of this article to discuss a personal issue. Both mhking and I have stated a shared point and you have given an valid reason as to have a different point then this.
TravKoolBreeze (talk) 04:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Invalid reason is the word I meant to say. If you like to share a different opinion, please have someone who supports this idea also bring up so we may discuss it.
TravKoolBreeze (talk) 04:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Other editor has explained well above and in edit comments that this was a channel merge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.8.142 (talk) 14:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Again, this sounds like a discussion with one person who has decided to use a different IP. If you feel this way, just saying you agree should not be it and you should have your own reasons to which you agree should be also included. Furthermore, there can not be a merge when the channel and format was gone and a press release had to be made because of consumer outrage of the channel being gone. TravKoolBreeze (talk) 18:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Also, if you are a different user, you may want to look at WP:PNSD. TravKoolBreeze (talk) 18:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Deal with DirecTV ends

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Does anyone have any time to elaborate on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bchilll (talk • contribs) 22:39, 8 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Possible article deletion

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article is not a directory and contains substantial content that clearly is not a directory. The listing of channels included in the article is a natural element of an article such as this.

The entry should not be deleted and should not have been flagged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.46.28 (talk) 06:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on XM Satellite Radio channel history. 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) 17:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:XM_Satellite_Radio_channel_history&oldid=1206099136"