This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.
This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 4 July 2024. The result of the move review was no consensus, relisted.
I hereby relist this RM, which was originally listed on 18 June 2024. As there wasn't a consensus to overturn BilledMammal's previous close at the move review, I don't think it's right to move the page back to ABC News until this discussion reaches consensus. Leave it here until the RM has played out in full, please. —S MarshallT/C15:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While ABC News owned by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) had considerable more audiences in absolute terms than the U.S. counterpart with similar name, we don't considered that, because without specify the country that originated when we searched on internet, "ABC News" is overhelmingly referred to the American one instead of Australian, even when we included the digital and social media platforms. So WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies here (see [discussion in 2017]). ABC News owned by ABC Australia may be the primary topic in its home country, but not elsewhere. 103.111.100.82 (talk) 00:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Anecdotally, most Australians are unfamiliar with the American ABC, and might be surprised to find out it's not the PTOPIC just because it isn't American. I do not believe either news organization has a reputation that exceeds their domestic audiences. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 03:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:PT1. The US news organisation doesn't appear to have usage more than all other topics combined, but would be good to get clear search data comparison presented, Tom B (talk) 19:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Comparing the Austrialia weekly numbers that include website/app users with the US nightly TV viewership is meaningless. If you look at Red-tailed hawk's links, all of ABC News Australia's TV broadcasts combined only get ~3,000,000 weekly viewers (the most-viewed episode of their most-viewed show only got 1.6 million viewers), compared to ABC News US's single "World News Tonight" broadcasts alone getting ~7,000,000 nightly viewers. If you want something to compare with the "8-digit levels of people" reached in Australia, per https://www.disneyadvertising.com/our-brands/abc-news/, the American ABC News reaches 167,000,000 people per month. The fact that one is owned by Disney and the other is owned by a publicly owned body is irrelevant and sounds like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Ahecht (TALK PAGE)19:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Given one is more nationally prominent where it broadcasts and the other is not, but has a larger audience, I feel that is a good rationale for having neither be the primary topic, instead of raw numbers which are crude. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:51, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Are we suddenly pretending that Albania and Spain do not exist? There are more "ABC News" topics than just the United States and Australia. There is a clear absence of a primary topic across the entire set of possible worldwide meanings. BD2412T19:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per above. There is no primary topic. Both news channels are quite prominent in their corresponding countries. Vpab15 (talk) 19:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As was previously discussed, there was vastly more page views to the United States page than there was to the Australia one. That makes it WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. That there are other ABC News elsewhere in the world than these two further is not relevant because those have even smaller amounts of traffic.
This page got many requested moves in its early history, and they all got the consensus to keep the article at ABC News. But now it got one that allowed it to be moved. How did it change?? Does it have anything to do with the popularity of Australian Wikipedians?? (For anyone who answers this question please study this talk page's whole history.) Georgia guy (talk) 00:23, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just found this via @BilledMammal doing mass edits all over wikipedia re-pointing links. I added my comment to the move review. Truly a wild change without much consensus. Ergzay (talk) 06:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]