This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofbusiness articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Quickflix is within the scope ofWikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage ofAustralia andAustralia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit theproject page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
I have just added archive links to one external link onQuickflix. Please take a moment to reviewmy 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 thechecked parameter below totrue 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 byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC 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 withthis tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.
There seems to be some debate around the tense of this article. It looks to me like the company is still trading, but perhaps is under different ownership. I'm going to undo the recent tense changes, as the account that did them has been blocked. If someone has more information that would be good.peterl (talk)23:09, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's back (again). Apparently the new owners are concentrating on public domain content, in-house produced content and indie producers not attached to big studios or production houses.92.19.115.244 (talk)22:02, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any citations confirming that this new company is a continuation of the old one and not just a new business with a similar name - we'd need such sourcing to write about it on Wikipedia.MrOllie (talk)18:32, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is plenty of information on their social media. I just checked. So you’ve undone edits that didn’t need to be undone. Things like that give Wikipedia a bad name.80.44.222.231 (talk)10:24, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is that social media run by the company which was wound up in 2021, or is it run by a new company that happens to have a similar name? That is what we need an independent source for.
So, let me get this straight, a company which buys a trading name and IP isn’t a reliable source? Okay. Gotcha. By that standard, if ITV announce a name change, it’s not a reliable source. Understood. Now I know why Wikipedia is losing credibility.80.44.222.231 (talk)21:53, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If ITV went out of business, and then several years later an Austrialian website popped calling itself 'ITV', no, that new web site would not be. And if no independent source commented on it, Wikipedia would not cover it.MrOllie (talk)22:03, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If ITV went out of business and someone else bought the trading name, then yes, it would be a continuation of the same business. That’s how business works.80.44.222.231 (talk)10:48, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
