Talk:Syfy

Bad Link?

The president of Scifi is David Howe, and it links to an article on -a- David Howe, but even a cursory glance at that article gives me great doubts that its the same guy. Hewhorulestheworld (talk) 15:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Reference Link 23 [ http://scifiwire.com/2009/03/sci-fi-president-dave-how.php ] is dead. It is this same David Howe link, I believe. Needs to be removed or updated.CynicSatirist (talk) 04:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Criticism?

Surely, for balance purposes, this article could include some criticism of the Sly-Fly channel's Saturday B-movies? I know they have produced a few decent films, but many are truly awful.—RJH (talk) 17:17, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

The criticism of the films is mainly film specific and already covered in the individual articles. For balance, it needs to include both sides, though, not just criticism. I've seen one or two articles covering the movies as a whole mentioned in some of those films, but would need to find them. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 17:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What about the fact that they air "Pro Wrestling" when there is no science fiction content in that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.157.32 (talk) 02:45, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Correct use of "Sci Fi" and "Syfy" in other articles

When I say "other articles" I am thinking mostly of the pages for television programs related in some way or ways to the channel; however I mean to address the subject in general, as it applies anywhere in Wikipedia.

I finished writing a lengthy discussion inquiry on the use of "Sci Fi" versus "Syfy" for the Torchwood talk page. The article briefly relates episodes of Torchwood aired on BBC America as being generally less edited than those of Doctor Who broadcast by Sci Fi Channel. I wasn't sure whether "Sci Fi Channel" should be altered to "Syfy" because those episodes of Doctor Who were edited and aired prior to the name change. When I had my post all typed out, I re-read it and realized I had spent several paragraphs and a great deal of time on a trivial detail, more or less completely unrelated to the Torchwood article, and that a discussion about the Syfy re-branding would be entirely out of place.

I think it makes the most sense to bring the conversation here; even though its the place intended to talk about improving the Syfy article specifically, which happens to be the ONLY page specifically excluded. Ultimately, I have the following questions:

1. Should there be an active effort to change "Sci Fi Channel" to "Syfy" across Wikipedia?

2. When, if ever, should "Sci Fi" be left as it is? Only when the difference is to-the-point, such as when mentioning the re-branding itself? What about things entirely contained before the change of names? For example, consider this sentence from the article, Battlestar Galactica (2004 series): "The series first aired as a three-hour miniseries in December 2003 on the Sci Fi network and ran for four seasons thereafter, ending its run on March 20, 2009."

3. Is it ever appropriate (or perhaps a good idea) to include one name or the other parenthetically, such as in the first sentence of this article: "Syfy (formerly known as the Sci Fi Channel)...". Would it ever make sense to use the style "Syfy (previously known as Sci Fi)" or "Syfy (known as Sci Fi prior to July 7, 2009)" instead of "the Sci Fi Channel (now known as Syfy)" or "Sci Fi (known as Syfy since July 7, 2009)", or vice versa?

I'm sure I haven't included everything I meant to, so please ask questions of your own or answer ones I should have asked. And holler if you know a better place for this topic to go. Invisigoth841 (talk) 20:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

No, an active effort is not needed. Here is actually where the whole historical use discussed above actually comes into play. As per what is done with other companies/channels, refer to it by the name it was at the time the series aired. So most of the tyime, that will be Sci Fi channel. If, however, the series is still running but started before the name, such as Eureka, then either include a one sentence note that Sci Fi rebranded itself to Syfy, or use something like "the series premiered on Syfy, then called the Sci Fi channel, on X where it continues to air." New series that premiere on Syfy should, of course, use Syfy. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 21:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Should there be an active effort to change "Sci Fi Channel" to "Syfy" across Wikipedia?

Well, just about every single link to www.scifi.com that is in wikipedia is a dead link. I ran a quick search, and it brings up more than 5100 pages on just the english language wiki that will need to be re-edited. Much as I'd like to boost my edit count up there, it will be a large undertaking. Some of the pages are on archive.org, some are not. Tangurena (talk) 17:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Use of "Sci Fi Channel" in the Ratings section

At the time of this writing, the first sentence of the Ratings section reads:

"In 2008, Syfy, then the Sci Fi Channel, averaged a 1.0 Household rating..."

I believe that the first sentence should read as such:

"In 2008, the Sci Fi Channel (now Syfy) averaged a 1.0 Household rating..."

I believe it should be written like this because it was not called Syfy last year, it was the Sci Fi Channel. The wording of this sentence better conveys the history of the channel, as it was not changed to Syfy until a few days ago. The channel hasn't changed ownership or anything, it's still the same. It's just changed names. Worded the other way, it still conveys the name change, but having the old name set after the new title puts more emphasis on the new title rather than the fact that it wasn't called Syfy back then. I have made a change of this nature twice. My first one did not even mention the name change, which is why I made the second revision to better reflect that. It has since been reverted for the reasoning that the "article is about SyFy, so sentence reflects this better as is." The article is STILL about the channel, but when the ratings were gathered, the channel was not called Syfy. The new sentence better reflects that the change is a recent one by putting the old name first, thereby drawing the reader's attention to the fact that when the ratings were gathered, it was still called the Sci Fi Channel.

You may believe this is a somewhat trivial matter, but I believe it is necessary to better convey the nature of the change and the ratings that were gathered. Also, if you want, it can be set off with commas rather than parentheses, if you think it would look better. -- Interrupt_feed (talk) 22:50, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

The former sentence is better written, flows better, and remains focused on the subject. The article is about Syfy, which was once known was the Sci Fi Channel, not the Sci Fi Channel now known as Syfy. As you noted, it has not changed anything, only names, wich is why it is properly written to focus on the actual channel itself, noting the name change, rather than focusing on the old name, first. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 22:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Syfy Original Movies

Syfy is now referring to these films as Syfy Original Movies [1], therefore this category should be renamed to reflect that change. Jason.cinema (talk) 00:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Nothing on that site says "Syfy Original Movies" - the category was already misnamed, because they were called Sci Fi Original Pictures, without the channel. A rename request is already in place to fix this. The movie air time is now called "Syfy Saturday" but that is not the same as the actual "Sci Fi Pictures" movie making area. Need better clarification as to whether they have renamed the actual moving making unit or not. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Here's an example of them calling their movies "Syfy Original Movies" - the page for the airing of their upcoming Syfy Original Movie Hellhounds. [2] - as well as the schedule for the airing on their site which also refers to it, and all of their other movies airing that day, as Syfy Original Movies. [3]]. Jason.cinema (talk) 13:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The first link does not actually use the phrase "Syfy Original Movie". The second one does, however it still isn't clear if that is just the airing name or if they have actually renamed the division within the company as well. I'm going to try emailing them to see if they clarify. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 14:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Craig Engler, Syfy's VP of Digital Media, has a Twitter account where he's answering questions about all things Syfy - http://www.twitter.com/syfy I think that would be a better way to contact Syfy, rather than an email, as those things are usually generic autoresponses. Jason.cinema (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Someone add in taht their "movies" are so crap the make sure to put the logo in a very out of the way place to not put people off in the video store! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.57.130 (talk) 05:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Anti-American?

i wouldn't have thought that sci fi/syfi was "anti-American", yet it states that in the opening sentence of the article...if someone can explain to me how this is supposed to sound, that would be great. as of now, it makes me think of anti-American protests in other countries...Osmo250 (talk) 16:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

It isn't, the article was vandalized. Vandalism has been removed. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 17:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager on Syfy

Will Syfy ever acquire the broadcast rights to Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager sometime in the near future? AdamDeanHall (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

No since they are still being showing in syndication on other stations. Also, you will find your keys are in the jeans you left in the bathroom, the winning lottery numbers are 4,8,12,23,and 40. When you meet Jennifer tell her "the blue one". How the hell would anyone here know. Why don't you ask them what their plans are?

Place these questions to CBS-Paramount Domestic Television Distribution, or perhaps even National Amusements. This isn't the place to discuss that. Perhaps a Star Trek forum, or even the Star Trek Wiki, would be the place. Apple8800 (talk) 10:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

What's going to happen to WWE NXT (TV series) on Syfy?

What's going to happen to WWE NXT (TV series) on Syfy? Will it be canceled or moved to another station? AdamDeanHall (talk) 19:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Please direct these questions to the powers-that-be over to NBC Universal, or whatever the company's name is now. This is NOT the place to ask. Apple8800 (talk) 10:38, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Critics?

Good source: http://www.denofgeek.com/television/784179/does_syfy_really_love_scifi.html

Gonioul (talk) 22:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Disappointment in the downward spiral of content since the name change would be an understatement. Continued delays and cancellations of new shows for the BSG re-imagined series has generated an aversion hurting what few good shows remain. Content has reverted to more an more cheapo B to C grade reality based ventures leaving it on par with the home shopping network in terms of cable value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.118.203 (talk) 05:28, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with this previous statement and I've seen it echoed all over the web (damn I should get a link). SyFy killed SciFi. They've cancelled so many shows that there is hardly any scifi anywhere. 86.195.171.87 (talk) 23:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Pronunciation of station name

I thought "Syfy" was meant to be pronounced the same as "sci-fi". Isn't it? AlexanderKaras (talk) 23:41, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Gawd, whoever is in charge of this station are idiots. Goddamn network decay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.48.56.129 (talk) 01:45, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Following their FAQ is has to be pronounced like "sci-fi". That would be /ˈsaɪfaɪ/, as far as i know. Quiss42 (talk) 11:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

"to the horror and shock of many fans"

OK I know you're mad that they're canceling SG:U but seriously, find a source or these weasel words are gonna get taken down. Alphachimera (talk) 05:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Syfy letting viewers create new movie

What happened to this project? Is the movie actually getting made? And are viewers really being given any real input? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.112.31 (talk) 02:09, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Importance

Is it alright to move the importance for "Low" to "Mid" on the importance scale, because Syfy is an international TV chanel, not a TV show. James3167 (talk) 19:13, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

The announced projects lists are not notable

The large sections of this article devoted to announced projects seems to be mere trivia with no real purpose for being here. Certainly programs that were actually produced and had some influence on television or sci-fi in general or brought fame for the channel would all be more signficant that shows that have not been aired. The "Announced, unrealized projects" section is especially bad as we already know those never will be aired. DreamGuy (talk) 17:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I'd have to respectfully disagree. It's a window into creative thinking and corporate decision-making as to what projects get chosen and which do not — andt this is particularly true of the ones that get so far along their pipeline that the network feels confident enough to announce them.

Additionally, in the cases naming specific creators such as Martin Scorsese, this is biographical material that confirms those creators interest and involvement in certain themes, genres and producing partners. This is historically valuable material.

Trivia is information for its own sake; fancruft is information primarily of interest to fans who spend a great deal of time and energy on their particular hobby interest. This, on the other hand, is historical background pertinent to any reasonable understanding of the television industry in general and of this network in particular. I'm sure sure one can say, in that respect, that only produced projects are significant. What goes unproduced says just as much about the television industry and the people involved, over and above the value of this material as part of creators' biographies. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Who is Sy and why do we care about his fy?

I never watch this channel so I did not notice the change until it was critizied on the Big Bang Theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6002:6:59F6:C5E:9A0D:4F (talk) 03:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Cool story bro. Why bother to make a post pimping BBT here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.32.193.80 (talk) 10:18, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Programming section

In December, an editor unilaterally removed two entire sections of pertinent, historical data, claiming it was "outdated." By that claim, ANY historical data is "outdated." Please see WP:Recent. I understand it was a bold edit, but removing two entire sections is something that needs to be discussed first — and per WP:BRD, it's bold (done), revert (done), discuss (as I've begun here). --Tenebrae (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

== the Sci Fi Channel redirect ==

For reasons unknown, Sci Fi channel was redirecting to Syfy Universal, even though the 1988-2009 history of the Channel is chronicled solely in Syfy. Whoever created the redirect apparently targeted Syfy to Syfy Universal at the same time as creating a redirect of Sci Fi Channel (United States) to Syfy. This distinction is meaningless, because there never was a "Sci Fi Channel (UK)" or "Sci Fi Channel (Latvia) or any "Sci Fi Channel (Not US). -- all foreign satellites had other names. Anyone seeking "Sci Fi Channel" will most likely be seeking the 1988-2009 history of Syfy. Bustter (talk) 13:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Sci Fi Channel redirect

It seems obvious [to me at least] that anyone searching Sci Fi Channel will be seeking the 1988-2009 history of that entity, which is contained in the article Syfy. Someone had Sci Fi Channel redirecting to Syfy Universal which bears little relation to the entity known as the Sci Fi Channel. Whoever created this redirect also made a redirect of Sci Fi Channel (United States) to SyFy, but this is pretty meaningless as the international satellites did not carry the name Sci Fi Channel -- there was no Sci Fi Channel (UK) or Sci Fi Channel (Latvia), no Sci Fi Channel (not United States) . Bustter (talk) 13:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

My point above is, I changed the redirect so that Sci Fi Channel now targets Syfy. Bustter (talk) 13:57, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Old logo

I agree with User:DayleLucy101 that the old logo is historically important, just as it would be for any TV network. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:11, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Kyrpton prequel series announced, created by David S. Goyer.

Here's the source. It will air on the SyFy network. 2601:C:780:234:B027:24E4:1F98:A860 (talk) 01:31, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Article lead

This article is primarily about the American channel, certainly as evidenced by the lead's second paragraph. It was never known as "SF" in the US, and in fact was only known as SF in one country and only for a short time. That makes it trivia in terms of WP:LEAD. which is supposed to summarize the most signiciant content and important milestones. Adding a context-less fringe name in the lead without explanation creates the impression that the American can was known as SF at some point. That is clearly inaccurate.--Tenebrae (talk) 05:02, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 7 August 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, opposes look to be rough consensus (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 18:51, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

---

Syfy → Syfy (U.S. TV network) – I'm sure people would argue that this page is the primary topic, and I can understand that. However, considering the amount of channels named "Syfy" at this point, I think this page needs to be moved accordingly. 67.87.222.82 (talk) 15:10, 7 August 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. ^Ḉɱ̍ 2nd anniv. 17:37, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

In addition, if the move happens, Syfy should be redirected to Syfy Universal for all its channels. 67.87.222.82 (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. No indication the American network isn't the primary topic, and it's safe to assume it is since it is the parent network for the other SyFys. Calidum ¤ 02:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose — current holder of Syfy is the primary topic. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 01:59, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose – the U.S. Syfy is the primary. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:17, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The channel's name is now capitalized. Revisions should be made to this article

This is per NBCUniversal's press release announcing the channel's rebrand back to science fiction and its fandom.

http://www.nbcumv.com/news/syfy-“reboots”-ahead-25th-anniversary?network=33143

What does it stand for? If it's an initialism, we'd refer to it in all caps throughout the article. If it's just a styling, we mention it once in the intro. —C.Fred (talk) 03:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 22 June 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved DrStrauss talk 06:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

---

Syfy → SYFY – The name appeared in capital letters this past Monday. AdamDeanHall (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. It's just a logo. The name itself in regular text is Syfy. Georgia guy (talk) 18:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose, violates MOS:TM. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:23, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose, you don't see Viceland as VICELAND, Adult Swim as [adult swim], Nickelodeon as nickelodeon, or, get my point? It's just a stylized logo they could rebrand again at any time in the next 5 years. (as a matter of fact, Syfy is known to change its logo more often than the examples I mentioned, too) And as the contributor above me has stated, it opposes MOS:TM. --GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 04:41, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. MOS:TM not an acronym. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:11, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per all the above. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per previous comments. ╠╣uw [talk] 18:29, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose, rather strongly. Firstly, it's not even clear that the new logo is ALLCAPS. Second, even if it is, WP:OFFICIALNAME and WP:COMMONAME (and the aforementioned MOS:TM) still apply. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:18, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. (Are we supposed to change the title of a WP article every time a network changes its logo from ALLCAPS to ittybittyletters?) Shearonink (talk) 02:41, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose – "SYFY" doesn't stand for anything. 2604:2000:524F:5000:A942:33D5:9A63:3378 (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
• Comment – As this move request seems as if it is going to fail, I request that SYFY, Syfy (U.S. TV network), and Syfy (U.S. TV channel) be created as redirects to this article to avoid further confusion. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:9C59:3156:D453:3EC5 (talk) 12:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

• That last request is reasonable. I will attempt to create the requested redirects, though it probably won't happen for a few days. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:33, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Announced series/pilots section

Do we really need announced series or pilots on this article? I feel like it is adding too much to the article. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:8BB:55F:E0BA:1473 (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• Including forthcoming shows that have been ordered to series is certainly reasonable, IMO – in other words, those series are certain to air at some point, and is reasonable under WP:CRYSTALBALL. However, including those that are simply TV pilot orders (only) is not-notable, and should not be included. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:38, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

However, this is better covered at List of programs broadcast by Syfy, and so should probably removed from this article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

•  Done – I have removed that section, as per my comments above. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:26, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Article and redirect moves

I have moved a number of redirects and the linked article Syfy Universal (formerly "Syfy (TV channel)"). All redirects that concern the U.S. channel, or are from legacy titles (eg SciFi...), now target Syfy. Editors should take care when retitling sections to repair broken redirects. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:21, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Region specific branding

The UK & Ireland has had SYFY rebranded to Sky Sci-Fi, if I find a source is it worthy enough to include on the article? Thepenguin9 (talk) 19:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)