Template talk:News Corporation

This is a truly ridiculous template. Waaaaaay too big.

...of course, it's a ridiculous corporation, also way too big.

It's smaller than Template:NBC Universal and Template:Disney. also,a s a courtesy to other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, and WikiProject pages. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then be automatically added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info, read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. -Zeus-^u_c 03:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think James really needs to be added now and possibly remove Lachlan seeing as how he has no major role in the company at present time. Perry mason (talk) 11:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does News Corp not now own Dow Jones? Could the (pending) be removed? Xt828 (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the deal is not complete until 5:00 p.m. ET, December 12, 2007 which is the deadline for the exchange of Dow Jones shares into 'Newco' (basically newscorp class b) shares.[1] it is highly unlikely (probably near on impossible) for the deal to fail now but i guess for official purposes, editing should probably be left until this time.

Perry mason (talk) 18:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shareholders did approve the sale, as of earlier today. I have noted this in the template, and the article also says that by tomorrow, News Corporation will be the owner. --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 22:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The section ""Fox O&Os"" lists the stations which come under Fox Television Stations which is already mentioned under US broadcast TV. This is equal to listing all Sky and star channels .I suggest that the o&o section be deleted. Vinay84 (talk) 06:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has disagrred or opposed the deletion, I am going ahead and doing it.Vinay84 (talk) 07:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the addition of child groups to the template, for a couple of reasons: (1) In my view they placed an excessive emphasis on the corporate directors at the top and other assets at the bottom of the temeplate which were not within child groups. (2) The child groups do not select, so a reader will have to manually open the correct box. Readers may not immediately know which box to open and therefore be left having to hunt through the template.

In my view a better approach would be collapsible groups with a selectable function, so that when the template is opened the relevant section of the template is automatically revealed and the rest of the template left collapsed, but still accessible. I also think that the corporate directors and "other assets" should be put into collapsed groups to avoid giving the excessive prominence. I would personally prefer to see the directors moved to the bottom of the template rather than being at the top, but that is something of a separate issue.Rangoon11 (talk) 12:50, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]