Paramount Network was nominated as aMedia and drama good article, but it did not meet thegood article criteria at the time (July 22, 2018). There are suggestions onthe review page for improving the article. If you can improve it,please do; it may then berenominated.

This article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

CompaniesMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcompanies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests :Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess :Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit :Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox :Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain :Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located atCategory:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the{{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the{{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answerrequests for comments Television:StationsMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles abouttelevision programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you canjoin the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to thestyle guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported bythe Television stations task force (assessed asMid-importance). United States:TelevisionLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to theUnited States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported byAmerican television task force (assessed asMid-importance). RadioMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofRadio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Create:Missing years and articles in radio,National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary) Assess :Unassessed Radio articles;Unknown-importance Radio articles Cleanup :Radio articles needing attention Expand :Midweek PoliticsBob Crane Maintain :Portal:Radio Stubs : Expand:Radio stubs Verify :Unreferenced BLPs Other :Collaboration of the Week: Requests for Radio peer review: Rod Serling The Howard Stern Show The History of Rock & Roll American Top 40;The Museum of Curiosity;Scott Mills (radio show) MediaMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMedia 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. WikiProject Media To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup :Media influence,Video game culture,Sound bite NPOV :Content (media and publishing) Verify :Multimedia,Alternative media,Alternative newspaper Other : Answerrequests for comments California:Los Angeles /Southern CaliforniaMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of theU.S. state ofCalifornia 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported byLos Angeles area task force (assessed asMid-importance). This article is supported bySouthern California task force (assessed asMid-importance).

Why was it moved from Spike TV? They may just say "Spike" on-screen, but the channel is still OFFICIALLY known as Spike TV. If no one objects I will move it back later today.TJ Spyke20:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know who tagged the article with "unreferenced," but I think I know why. Please source the demographic statements at the end of the opening paragraph. -Desmond Hobson22:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked an admin with a lot of experience in fair use images. This is her reply:

That's quite a tough one because there is no strict guideline where you could point and say: here it is! (BTW, I am not keeping up with latest developments on fair use policies) My take at this: If someone wrote an articleLogos of Spike TV or a decent section about them then it would be ok to show all those logos (of course, the article might be subject toWP:OR and notability guidelines). As of right now, it is a violation of the policy because there are too many of them (FUC#3), they do not identify the subject of the article (the first logo used in the infobox does, FUC#8), they do not illustrate text (in fact the section has no text, FUC#8). Also practical look: such galleries do not belong to articles in any case, even if the images are free (Wikipedia is not an image gallery). That's my take on this.Renata03:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My own understanding is the same as Reanata's. We use to blankly forbid all galleries of fair use images. Now we allow it in exceptional circumstances, but I do not find the circumstances exceptional. I am removing the galleryAlex Bakharev03:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I personally just came to this page to see all the old logos and remember the past... I guess Wikipedia isn't about maintainingall knowledge. Unfortunate. -24.141.153.5605:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When Spike TV was know as TNN-The National Network/the New TNN, they have a special version of the logo used from 2000 to 2003 when they had WWF/WWE programming on. this logo had the letters TNN styled in the WWF/WWE scratch logo font that the WWE/WWF used for their attitude era logo and the current WWE logo.—The precedingunsigned comment was added byBoutitbenza 69 9 (talk •contribs)05:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Image:TNNlogo.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is noexplanation or rationale as to why its use inthis Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to theboilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent withfair use.

Please go tothe image description page and edit it to include afair use rationale. Using one of the templates atWikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot04:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

_ _ This title is too cryptic for a section, in spite of the sent in the lead 'graph that says

By mid-2006, the on-screen name was shortened to simply "Spike."

(And i, for one, am likely not to read the lead for inside-baseball details on large topics i'm already acquainted with.) It doesn't sound like the name change was even a clearly recognizable event, let alone a notable one, let alone one thatcharacterizes the roughly 3 years since the end of the preceding section's scope, as a section title must.
_ _ I doubt i have the best perspective to fix this mess, but i can improve it, and others can work from there.
--Jerzy•t18:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found

Though the programming is still aimed at the male demographic (age 18-35), Spike no longer makes the claim of "the first network for men". This is, in part, due both to the fact that there had been earlier forays into "male-only" television (such asMenTV inCanada) to the risk of losing its Canadian audiences due to risk of "duplication" (in terms of programming and target audience) according toCanadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission regulations.

The second sentence is nonsense for lack of an "and" to pair with the "both". I inserted an "and":

Though the programming is still aimed at the male demographic (age 18-35), Spike no longer makes the claim of "the first network for men". This is, in part, due both to the fact that there had been earlier forays into "male-only" television (such asMenTV inCanada)and to the risk of losing its Canadian audiences due to risk of "duplication" (in terms of programming and target audience) according toCanadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission regulations.

then reflected the likelihood that "due ... to the fact" is unverifiable, and cleaned up various things that are problems if my "and" is correct:

Though the programming is still aimed at the male demographic (age 18-35), Spike no longer makes the claimto be "the first network for men".Presumable motivations for this include acknowledging earlierattempts at "male-only" television (such asMenTV inCanada),and the risk of losingaccess to its Canadian audiences due toa claim of "duplication" (in terms of programming and target audience)contrary toCanadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission regulations.

IMO it still needs work: explanation is needed of what they should fear duplicating and why they would believe that they can hide their target audience unless they are willing to change their programming to do it! It also would reduce confusion if a non-Canadian prior example were available to add or substitute: as it stands, i'mstill not sure that theCanadian origin of MenTV is not part of the problem with the RTC regs.
--Jerzy•t22:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here's another like it:

most of the two network systems

which i can only interpret as meaning the same as

both of the two network systems

I'm replacing the language i found with

worth up to $80 million, despite each of those network systems having previously aired at least part of the original trilogy

But in case it means something else, this is here to help in cleaning up the new mess i've made.
--Jerzy•t23:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Thenewtnnlogo1.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is noexplanation or rationale as to why its use inthis Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to theboilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent withfair use.

Please go tothe image description page and edit it to include afair use rationale. Using one of the templates atWikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk)21:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest we split this article intoTNN (TV channel) andSpike (TV channel). The TNN sections are taking up nearly half the article, and I think there is sufficient information and references in that article to create a separate one and leave this article to Spike alone. --Zpb52 (talk)03:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote For - nominating vote --Zpb52 (talk)03:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Vote For --Caldorwards4 (talk)05:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Vote For - The Nashville Network was so different from the current Spike TV, it needs to have its own article.Steevo714 (talk)23:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Vote For I agree with Steevo714Weeliljimmy^talk17:01, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Vote For - I agree with the split. Searches onTNN are basically met with a blank wall! TNN needs to have a reference of its own.66.159.210.127 (talk)09:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Vote For - In the way thatDetective Comics had a different article thanBatman --Knulclunk (talk)13:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose Standard convention on other pages it keep its total history intact despite a format change. No reason to change that here. Examples includeION Television,Investigation Discovery,Versus (TV channel),Hallmark Channel andTruTV. Convention changes should be decided atWikipedia:WikiProject Television --Cmjc80 (talk)21:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very strong oppose Just like what Cmjc80 said up there, there is no reason to do the split. Many pages have this type of merge, and it keeps well. This article is also like that. If we split this page, it would be almost like 2 stubs because both of the networks on the page seem to just fit together, plus it would just be a waste of time that could be used on other pages.WWEISREAL15:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like there's no objection (or anything, for that matter), so I'm going to go ahead and split these articles. --Zpb52 (talk)13:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Entry says "Texas based Gaylord Entertainment," but theGaylord Entertainment entry gives no indication that it was ever Texas-based, although they have a hotel in Texas. It was previously part of an Oklahoma publisher, and now is headquartered in Tennessee. I'm removing the "Texas based."Oswald Glinkmeyer (talk)20:03, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also. Gaylord sold TNN at same time CMT was sold (around 1996). This article is wrong.

"Today, after several changes of ownership and name, Spike operates as part of MTV Networks, owned by Viacomand is one of 4 to not belong to a brand."

I have no idea what this is trying to say. Can someone clean it up?Lexicon(talk)03:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rumors on this YouTube page shows "at 6:00am on July 22, 2010 Spike TV left digital cable and satellite for directv and dish network after an episode Jail replaced by New Nick GAS for My Family's Got Guts & BrainSurge." by YouTube Username, lerdalparker23. This has however not been verified by MTV Networks, Viacom or Nickelodeon Productions—Precedingunsigned comment added by4.245.11.74 (talk)19:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Way to go Mike for showing Youtube Users that their videos are being stolen! WOOT!—Precedingunsigned comment added byStuPeg (talk •contribs)04:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does this really belong in this article? YouTube was also launched in 2005, which later suffered a class action lawsuit reported to be over $1 billion. Spike.com's managing division claims that they only host videos they approve after they are submitted.[36] YouTube Partner user Mike Mozart pointed out videos on Spike.com/iFilm that were uploaded from YouTube onto Spike.com, without permission as their descriptions are criticizing the video itself. He also pointed out that YouTube embeds hosted on Spike.com did not link back to YouTube, and any sort of video hyperlinking was forcibly disabled, contradicting YouTube's Terms of Use.[37]This link goes to a YouTube video where a man talks about toys. I do not think it adds much to the article.--BeckiGreen (talk)00:23, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link onSpike (TV network). 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:

• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/20100218104440/http://www.tnawrestling.com:80/news/item/1772-impact-moves-to-mondays-on-march-8 tohttp://www.tnawrestling.com/news/item/1772-impact-moves-to-mondays-on-march-8

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.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online}16:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry but it wasnt its airing of WWF programming that started its wrestling years

its well known that between 1999 & 2000 TNN briefly aired (it is surmised as a test run for wrestling on the network) episodes of ECW on TNN

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECW_on_TNN

Tony Spike (talk)23:52, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WhenSpike becomes the Paramount Network next year, it may have the rights to all the classicStar Trek shows and movies. At the moment, those classicStar Trek shows are currently airing onH&I.AdamDeanHall (talk)16:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Spike is owned by paramount, It will just be a name change. They already have the rights to play Star Trek, they just don't.--ANDREWs13 (talk)02:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CBS Studios owns theStar Trek rights. Viacom can't do anything unless they pay licensing fees to CBS for the shows and films, and CBS basically pays nothing to put it onCBS All Access. That arrangement isn't changing (and 98% of people are loyal to the title itself, not whatever the studio is on the end card).Nate•(chatter)03:34, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links onSpike (TV channel). Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/web/20070930183808/http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2001/apr01/apr09/1_mon/news2monday.html tohttp://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2001/apr01/apr09/1_mon/news2monday.html
• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/web/20070930183808/http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2001/apr01/apr09/1_mon/news2monday.html tohttp://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2001/apr01/apr09/1_mon/news2monday.html

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 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)17:11, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This review istranscluded fromTalk:Paramount Network/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer:Adamstom.97 (talk·contribs)23:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not familiar with this sort of article, I generally focus strictly on film and TV pages, but I think this one has been waiting for long enough so I'll see what I can do. I'll have a good read through the page soon, and get back to you with some thoughts. -adamstom97 (talk)23:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in getting this up. Unfortunately, having read through the article, I feel that there is just too much unsourced content (and the sources that are there are not all up to par) to promote this to GA. I suggest work be put into fully sourcing everything in the article, and improving in-line citations to more accurately indicate what content is coming from where. Also ensure that all citations are properly filled out and archived. A general copy-edit also wouldn't hurt, for instance the lead reads like a bullet point list that has been formatted as prose rather than a natural paragraph. Once these issues have been dealt with you should feel free to nominate the article for GA again and I may pick it up if I see it. But for now, I amfailing this review. -adamstom97 (talk)06:46, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Paramount Network (Blue) Logo.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at thenomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk)17:23, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Paramount Network.svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk)02:53, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was just wondering. Why don't we make the infobox for Spike Cable Networks, Inc.? This is something we could do for the copyright holder for Paramount Network as well as other holders fromMTV Entertainment Group.RamsesTimeGame (talk)04:40, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has requested thatThe Nashville Network be moved toTNN (American TV channel), which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate inthe move discussion. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫‍(talk)21:50, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Options under discussion include possible merger of content from this article (Paramount Network § The National Network, the New TNN, and professional wrestling (2000–2003)) to a new "TNN" article. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫‍(talk)21:52, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Former good article nominees
• B-Class company articles
• Mid-importance company articles
• WikiProject Companies articles
• B-Class television articles
• Mid-importance television articles
• B-Class Television stations articles
• Mid-importance Television stations articles
• Television stations task force articles
• WikiProject Television articles
• B-Class United States articles
• Low-importance United States articles
• B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
• B-Class American television articles
• Mid-importance American television articles
• American television task force articles
• WikiProject United States articles
• B-Class Radio articles
• Mid-importance Radio articles
• WikiProject Radio articles
• B-Class Media articles
• Mid-importance Media articles
• WikiProject Media articles
• B-Class California articles
• Mid-importance California articles
• B-Class Los Angeles articles
• Mid-importance Los Angeles articles
• Los Angeles area task force articles
• B-Class Southern California articles
• Mid-importance Southern California articles
• Southern California task force articles
• WikiProject California articles