Jump to content

Talk:Television broadcasting in Australia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleTelevision broadcasting in Australia was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 14, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
June 18, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

The table

[edit]

What do the things in the parentheses mean? Originally I think they listed the owners of the stations. Now it looks like people have just added any old thing they want about the stations, like alternate names, locations etc. These parantheses need some coherent cleanup. - Randwicked Alex B 01:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I second that matturn 02:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of Gripes I lived in the Illawarrra area for years and Yes you are free to pick up Sydney TV Stations using a VHF antenna from Wollongong, Shellharbour to Kiama. Illawarra people have a direct line of sight to the transmitters by pointing it towards Botany Bay you are able to receive Sydney Channels, look at the ABC Sydney coverage map and you see coverage spilling over escarpment to the illawarra. The local channels may anger us Illawarra citizens pre 2005 where station logos, NON Digital TV content and plain crapiness made us install new Antennas to watch Sydney's TV.

I reckon there should be another Row in the table that distinguishes the Gold Coast QLD and NSW as having 8 Commercial Stations or even 13 if you live in the southern areas of Gold coast inc: 7 QLD, Prime GC, NBN GC, 9 QLD, Ten QLD, SX 10 GC, ABC QLD, SBS QLD, Prime NSW 1hr, NBN NSW 1hr, SX Ten NSW 1hr, ABC NSW and SBS NSW 1hr. This would highlight where Gold coast sits in comparison to other regions when it comes to TV.

Update tag

[edit]

I notice the update tag - anyone have any idea what it is that needs to be updated? If not, I'll remove it. -- Chuq 10:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The update was needed because Ten Mildura was listed as a future event, even though it began in January 2006. I've removed it and, because there doesn't seem to be any other dated material, I'll remove the tag. ZanderSchubert 05:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC) (jeez, it's taken a while...!)[reply]

Coverage maps

[edit]

Do people want to offer any suggestions to the style of these maps before I complete them for all broadcasters/networks and add them to individual pages?

-- Chuq 07:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not immediately clear what the subdivisions are, and which areas are covered and which aren't. I'm assuming that white areas aren't covered and the coloured subdivisions are the aggregated market areas. Perhaps just keep one tone for the covered areas to avoid confusion (but keep the borders). Other than that they are nice maps. Thanks. - Randwicked Alex B 10:35, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now I see the key. Could you add it to every image? - Randwicked Alex B 10:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Adding it to every image would be easy to do (its just another group of layers I need to make visible) but because each of the individual broadcaster maps only cover a few areas out of total number, the key would have several colours that weren't on the map, which may confuse people. I could make the coloured parts of the individual ones all the same colour, or perhaps colour according to what network's programming is carried? (I'll do up an example in the next hour or so.) -- Chuq 04:01, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New versions are below:

And yes, I know I have misspelled affiliate a couple of times - I'll fix it in the next version! I think I may change the "monopoly broadcaster" colour to black. I don't know the best way to mark joint ventures either - maybe just treat the JV company as a seperate company. -- Chuq 05:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "aggregated" and "non-aggregated" labels are moot given the current situation. If anything there are three groups, "one owner", "two owner" and "three owner". All regional markets are moving towards having three commercial affiliates, some of the old non-aggregated markets are already there. matturn 12:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about using "Satellite" to describe the regional WA area. A majority of population in regional WA recieve GWN and WIN WA from terrestrial transmission, not satellite. The sattelite transmission serves only to provide for people who live in small, isolated communities. Perhaps a better way to organise the key in the large map is as Matturn suggested, with "two station" and "three station". (I veer away from the term "Owner" because there are markets where two commercial stations are present, but both are owned by the same company.) Tntnnbltn 13:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I realise the "number of owners" doesn't equal the "number of channels" in some markets. I agree that differentiation by number of commercial channels is a good idea, and in hindsite better than my suggestion. Dividing by number of owners however matches the map's current focus on ownership. I also second your comment about the "satelite" markets. They should be grouped with the other two station (or owner) markets. Also part of Tassie is in the Central and Eastern Remote zone IIRC. matturn 06:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have now created an SVG version of the map Image:Australia television market regions.svg. Stickeylabel 13:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Channel number list

[edit]

Should we have a list of what channels are used in a location?
For example,

Brisbane

[edit]
Channel Name
2 ABC Analog
6 Seven Digital
7 Seven Analog
8 Nine Digital
9 Nine Analog
10 Ten Analog
11 Ten Digital
12 ABC Digital
28 SBS Analog
36 SBS Digital

Brisbane digital channels

or maybe

Analog

[edit]
Network Brisbane Sydney ...
ABC 2
ABC2 -
Seven 7
etc

Digital

[edit]

--RobBrisbane 01:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, it would get obscenely long. The channels are different in just about every town in the country. - ҉ Randwicked ҉ 11:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about having a separate page for tv channels in Queensland, or Brisbane? Or start with it on the main page, and split it off into states once it gets too big? How else can someone find out what analog / digital channels are available in an area, and what channels they use? --RobBrisbane 08:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a link to the relevant document on the ACMA site would be best than a huge table of numbers on here. -- Chuq 12:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen the way the US is done? We could do that for Oz.matturn 12:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. It works difference from there to here. Each Channel Nine affiliate (including NBN, WIN, Southern Cross, etc.) will show almost exactly the same programming, bar time differences, local programming, sport or or factors, while a majority of time on American networks is free, so that, excluding primetime, each NBC affiliate is free to syndicate any show they can get at any time. In short, in America, each station is different, but here, the differences are not as major to warrant separate articles for each, say, WIN broadcaster. (At least, that’s what I feel, looking at the American TV pages.) ZanderSchubert 04:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers for networks?

[edit]

Could someone explain why the national commercial broadcast networks in Australia are numbered 7, 9 and 10? Does the Seven Network appear on VHF Channel 7 in every market? -- Mwalcoff 02:43, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only the capital cities, but those hold the majority of Australia's population. They amalgamated with the stations on the same frequencies when networking came along. I guess this was for user convenience, as a few channels had to switch (like TVQ in Brisbane, which went from 0 to 10). - ҉ Randwicked ҉ 03:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
TVQ shifting had little to do with networking - The network was known as the 0/10 Network at the time. It moved because channel 0 is subject to interference, and a station on the nearby Darling Downs was forced to move frequency because it was seen as less important. Now the case of 7 and 10 in Adelaide swapping networks, that was due to networking... matturn 12:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another answer is "Yes", with minor exceptions. The 7, 9 and 10 networks only operate in the capital cities, though affiliate networks operate in other areas. There are some infill repeaters on other frequencies in the capitals though, and some affiliate networks use very similar names (like "Seven Queensland") matturn 12:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

name change

[edit]

i think the name of the article should be changed to something like "list of australian television networks and channels".it seems contradictory for the name to be List of Australian television channels when it also lists networks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.238.240.20 (talk) 18:55, 22 August 2006

I think Television in Australia would be more suitable, as it a lot more than a list now. (Television in Australia currently redirects to this article). -- Chuq 11:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the current name "Australian Television Broadcasting" isn't really a fair description of the page. As someone unnamed suggested - its basically a list of services its just that it includes both networks and stations (although technically I would suggest they are almost all networks) - Anyhow apart from a bit of a history blurb at the start it doesn't really describe much About the business and technicalities of television broadcasting. There are plenty of more aspects to Television Broadcasting. It could do well with something about the techical standards employed in Australia (a little unique I undestand), its a bit vague about the changes in focus at SBS and doesn't mention anything about comparative growth rates of Pay TV (low by international standards). The regulatory regime, why there aren't more FTA broadcasters in metro areas, 'the fourth channel', what the heck is happening with Digital TV (HDTV, Multichanneling) etc. Are these some issues that should be covered here? - Am I playing the devil's advocate? Abeorch 00:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point - I'll have a think about the best way to go about adding some of those in (Pay and Digital are two that could do with expansion). timgraham 01:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah .. I think the universal service obligation needs to be covered as well. I'm happy to help out. Abeorch 15:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please explain aggregation to this Yank

[edit]

Okay, the aggregation disambig page doesn't help me a lot. I know that "aggregation" was used in Australia in terms of the regions each station is allowed to broadcast in, but it still doesn't make sense to me. Is it similar to the "markets" we have in the US - for example, the Chicago market, or the Boston market? -Daniel Blanchette 20:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basically there used to be heaps of regional markets, each with a single broadcaster. The government, in an effort to increase support from regional voters, implemented aggregation. It basically meant merging license areas into big ones, and instead of an independant broadcaster in each market there would be three broadcasters (each affiliated to a metropolitan network). Now on the east coast there are only a bunch of license areas (Queensland, Northern NSW, Soutern NSW and Victoria are the main ones). A better link to find out more about regional television would be Regional television in Australia. It includes a section about aggregation. Tntnnbltn 06:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To put it more succinctly, Australia had small commercial TV markets in rural areas in the 1980's. Each was a monopoly. By the mid-1990's most of these markets were merged into larger markets with three commercial licences (or two in Tasmania), while a few were left monopolies. This merging was called "aggregation". Since then, more mergers and new licences have changed things. The terms "aggregated" and "non-aggregated" markets have only historical value, despite what certain Wikipedia articles may suggest. matturn 12:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article Review

[edit]

Congratulations, I have reviewed the article, and have decided that it meets the criteria to be considered a good article. From here, I would suggest that the article needs filling out with greater detail, and continue work on improving the prose. Supaluminal 09:16, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the article. I have listed the article at Wikipedia:Good articles under the appropriate section and I have updated the GA Number accordingly. Thanks. Stickeylabel 09:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nine not available in Melbourne??

[edit]

According to the table in the article, Nine is not available in Melbourne or regional Victoria... what the?! Someone fix this please. Davez621 15:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. timgraham 01:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

It has come to my attention that www.televisionau.com has been deleted by host.virtualreality.pk. This latter site is obviously a front for Pakistani terrorists.

Therefore, I request that host.virtualreality.pk be permanently deleted, as soon as possible.149.175.37.214 (talk) 22:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I call on all responsible Internet users to seek out host.virtualreality.pk/ for immediate deletion.198.236.192.210 (talk) 19:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Television broadcasting in Australia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    The prose is stubby, with paragraphs that are generally too short. Much of the content consists of listings of various items rather than coherent prose.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    The amount of inline citations do not satisfy current criteria for a GA article. Many of the references are also malformed.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    An article on this topic should contain a solid history section, in addition to listing the various aspects of current broadcasting.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    If the copyrighted image has been released for use by the owner, it should have a OTRS tag.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Lampman (talk) 13:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since no significant improvements have been made to the article over the last week, I will now delist it. Lampman (talk) 13:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PAL Analogue broadcasts / digital switch-over

[edit]

The table in PAL#Countries that have ceased using PAL says PAL broadcasting ceased in December 2013. Can this article be updated to confirm this or state where analogue broadcasting (apart from amateur TV) is still used? John a s (talk) 12:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Television broadcasting in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Television broadcasting in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:55, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Television broadcasting in Australia. 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) 00:28, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rename request

[edit]

I would like to rename this article to Television services in Australia. The current name implied that this article was about television in general, including what was being broadcast, and I was going to complain about having two articles that were seemingly redundant. After reading this article though, I thought a new name would be better, so to make it clearer to readers that this article is about who provides television, and how it gets to the viewer. MicedVolvo 03:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Television_broadcasting_in_Australia&oldid=1201143932"