Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Canada: Television Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian television. Television: Stations Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Television stations task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

So, yeah. The channel's dead. Final show seems to vary per carrier. Telus looks to have pulled the plug before 10PM EST on the 31st (warning: the kid's kind of annoying). Bell called it off before 12:30AM EST on Septembest 1st. We'll probably need someone subscribed to Rogers Cable to get a true final broadcast. That might be tough as the CRTC's data revealed a gargantuan drop in subscribers for 2016.

The URL now redirects to CityTV's website. The final new post on G4TV.ca was a review for ARMS posted on the 29th. - Damnedfan1234 ( talk) 09:55, 1 September 2017 (UTC) reply

When did SHAW sell its 33% ownership to Rogers? I know it makes sense, since Rogers seems to do everything.

It say it happend June 1st, 2006 Cavenba 21:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Where does it say they cannot remove the "techTV" from their name... Just because it is called G4 doesn't mean that it is not didicated to technology. Cavenba 22:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC) reply

I know, tha makes no sense to me either why they cannot change the name, other channels change their name and re-brand themselves all the time, I don't know why they cannot just drop the "techTV"?! ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 02:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

Why does it matter and how is the discussion related to the article. The CRTC of Canada is very strict. The way it goes - Mike Beckham 06:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

How is it not related to G4techTV Canada? It seems Rogers hasn't even tried to change the name, no application on CRTC.ca. (Btw: I am in Canada) Cavenba 08:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

I was asking how is it relevant to the article. Talk pages for articles are to speak about the article only. Unless you can source it, it doesen't belong. - Mike Beckham 09:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

There is also no source as to where it says they cannot change the name 142.68.204.13 15:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC) reply

This is only speculation on my part, but I think Rogers didn't change the name to G4 because its programming is directed towards technology as a whole and Rogers didn't want to change it because people not already familiar with the channel won't know what the channel is about. And it seems vert doubtful that the CRTC rgulates channel names, there have been so many name changes in the past few months/years, so... ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 23:31, 27 October 2006 (UTC) reply

I'm writing this because users are repeatidly reverting the name of G4techTV (Canada) to G4techTV Canada.... The name of the service is called G4techTV, not G4techTV Canada! Canada is put in (brackets) to signafy that it is a Canadian version. No where does the Canadian G4techTV use G4techTV Canada, not in its logo, not on its web site, not even in promos on the channel. The article should reflect the name of the service which is G4techTV! 74.109.62.238 03:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Copied from User talk:74.109.62.238:

Firstly, the channel's actual name is "G4techTV Canada." Please follow this link to see dozens of pages from the official website containing this phrase.

Secondly, your method of renaming the page (by cutting and pasting its text) is improper, as it destroys the article's revision history. Our software contains a special means of moving the page to a new title, but this function is available only to registered users whose accounts have existed for a minimum of approximately four days. For more information, see Help:Moving a page. — David Levy 04:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm afraid you are mistaken, check the www.g4techtv.ca for yourself, the channels name is G4techTV and Canada should be in (brackets). here for example, nowhere does it mention G4techTV Canada as its name, it even goes as far as to say... G4techTV in Canada.... not saying G4techTV Canada. This is just one of many examples. Its not G4techTV Canada, its G4techTV! ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 05:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Did you even bother to follow my link? — David Levy 05:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes, did you read my link? Even when describing itself it only uses G4techTV. I'l give an example... CourtTV in Canada is "officially" called CourtTV Canada. It uses it in its logo, on its web site, CHUM refers to it as CourtTV Canada and so on. G4techTV in Canada does not, its not in its logo, its not all over its web site and so on and nor does it use G4techTV Canada on the channel itslef, I know, I have the channel and watch it sometimes. It is not called G4techTV Canada is only G4techTV. ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 05:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

And another point, even its mailing address uses only G4techTV... here it is:

G4techTV

545 Lake Shore Blvd. West

Toronto, Ontario, CANADA

M5V 1A3

this address can be found here, it is at the very left hand bottom of the screen. I'm not sure how much more proof you need. ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 06:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

If you followed my link, you saw links to dozens of official pages in which the channel is explicitly referred to as "G4techTV Canada." I don't deny that the name "G4techTV" also is used, but we attempt to avoid parenthetical disambiguation whenever feasible. Given the fact that the channel's management uses the name "G4techTV Canada" in some contexts, that's a preferable page title.

And FYI, it isn't at all uncommon for an abbreviated name to be used for on-air branding. See, for example CNN International, which officially bears that name but is identified simply as "CNN" throughout most of the world. Another random example is Nickelodeon UK (known simply as "Nickelodeon" within the UK). — David Levy 06:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Your logic is not adding up, G4techTV Canada is only used to create a differnece between the Canadian and American versions. But this is an encylapedia, is should reflect the true name of the service which is G4techTV, thats why Canada is in brackets. It shows clearly that the name is actually G4techTV but it is in Canada and the Canadian version. This is done with serveral channels, Fine Living (Canada), HGTV (Canada) and so on. All of these channels names are Fine Living and HGTV but Canada is in brackets to signafy that it is the Canadian version just like G4techTV is. And the article of G4techTV is just simply G4techTV so the Canadian article has Canada put in brackets to make a difference between them. The channels name is G4techTV ok!!! Is that so hard for you to understand! And I tried redirecting from that link and it doesnt work for some reason ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 17:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Again, the channel explicitly refers to itself as "G4techTV Canada." This is a designation used by the management in an official capacity, not something that we invented for Wikipedia.

The page cannot be moved to G4techTV (Canada) because that page has a revision history. You're welcome to list a proposal at Wikipedia:Requested moves. — David Levy 18:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Well AGAIN... the channel explicitly refers to itself as "G4techTV". The terms and conditions and privacey pages clearly state this!!! And in various other ways as well. ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 18:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Again, we try to avoid parenthetical disambiguation whenever feasible. As both names are correct, we use the format lacking the parenthetical disambiguation. — David Levy 18:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Your argument is clearly wrong and you keep reverting the edits, your an administrator, u should know better, and I would like to make a complaint about this to the "big guys whoever gives administrator privaleges to users. ~The artist formally known as '''Cdn_boi'''~ 18:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

My opinion has nothing to do with the fact that renaming an article by cutting and pasting its text from one page to another is improper. As you are aware of this, continually doing so is vandalism (as I've explained on your talk page). — David Levy 18:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Musimax, please read WP:CUTPASTE, and stop trying to do this move (in fact, I've protected the target page so you can't). Before this move will go ahead, you'll have to put a request in at the move request page and wait for an administraor to perform a proper move. Suggest that both sides calm down and disengage for a few days. Mart inp23 19:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Looks liek one of my arguments was deleted on here, ummmmmm... so I'll post it again, read the terms and conditions and the privacey pages on the official web site and nohwere does it say "G4techTV Canada", it only refers to itself as G4techTV, now how much more proof do u guys need. In the privacey, terms and conditions, the about us pages and so on and so on. MusiMax 03:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Firstly, your argument was not deleted. It's right up there on the page.

Secondly, no matter how many times you cite official pages on which the phrase "G4techTV Canada" isn't used, they don't nullify the dozens of official pages on which the phrase "G4techTV Canada" is used. The channel officially uses both variants, so we use the one that doesn't require parenthetical disambiguation. — David Levy 04:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I've created a more formal section below as per the move process. If editors are more comfortable keeping it in here, by all means please collapse the next section into this one. Thanks. -- Ckatz ^chat _spy 04:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I am really torn here. I agree with both sides in some ways. For example the logo only says "G4techTV" however the header on the web page, http://www.g4techtv.ca , says "G4techTV Canada". On the other side, there is only 1 G4techTV on earth so it does not make much sence why it needs to have "Canada" at the end. However it displays "G4techTV Canada" on the main page and in the header of their website. In the "About G4techTV" section it only names its self "G4techTV". The one last conflict is the G4techTV in Canada announcer announces "G4techTV" without the Canada part. I believe that Rogers should possibly change their website and channel to only be "G4techTV" and make up their mind. Personally I do not think that Rogers cares about the channel at all. But that is unrelated to this. This was "TechTV Canada" at one point to add in.

In my own opinion I believe that the header and welcome text on their website is referring to the .ca part of their website. Meaning they are welcoming you to G4techTV in Canada. Not meaning that their name is G4techTV Canada. By looking at the logo, About section on the website and what the announcer states, I do believe that it should be named "G4techTV" on Wikipedia. Int X ( talk) 22:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply

Maybe G4techTV should redirect to here, with a note saying 'for the american channel formerly known as G4techtv, and the g4techtv info can be merged into G4 (TV channel), given that there's no longer a NON-Canada G4TechTV Webrunner 14:22, 12 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I agree, that sounds like a reasonable soulution. Theres isn't an American channel now named G4techTV, G4techTV only changed its name back to G4, so that info should really be in the G4 article. The same thing happened to OLN and OLN (Canada). OLN US changed its name to Versus and OLN (Canada) article took over the OLN named article and ULN US info was merged into the Versus article. 74.109.62.238 16:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC) reply

The difference in this case is that the U.S. G4techTV was a product of a merger between G4 and TechTV. The G4techTV article pertains as much to TechTV as it does to G4.

I do, however, agree that the G4techTV location should not belong to the article about the U.S. channel (as this is not a primary usage). It should become a disambiguation page with links to G4techTV Canada and G4techTV (US). — David Levy 17:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC) reply

The G4techTV article can be merged into both the TechTV and G4 articles. Both articles already have a little info regarding the merge. G4techTV was really an evolution of G4. Its kinda the same as Prime evolving into TVtropolis, the merge created an new channel and that new channel was an evolution of what is G4 now. So I think G4techTV's info should really be added to TechTV and G4 both, and the G4techTV title should be used for the Canadian channel because thee is no G4techTV US anymore. 74.109.62.238 00:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC) reply

G4techTV was not "an evolution of G4." It was the product of a merger between G4 and TechTV, with the latter contributing the vast majority of subscribers. One could argue that G4techTV was a precursor to the current G4, but that's barely true from a programming standpoint.

The fact that the U.S. G4techTV no longer exists doesn't mean that it's no longer a major usage of the term. When someone types "G4techTV," there is not an overwhelmingly greater likelihood that he/she is searching for one version of the channel rather than the other. In fact, there's an excellent chance that he/she is interested in both (given their close connection), so a disambiguation page would be quite helpful and appropriate. — David Levy 18:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC) reply

How about this: G4TechTV should be the Canadian article, G4 should include the info on G4TechTV during the merged phase (since G4 now is the same channel as G4TechTV), and have a section on the OLD G4, and a link to TechTV. G4TechTV should have a top-disambig line ("This article is for the canadian channel currently known as G4TechTV, for the channel formely known as G4TechTV in the US, go to G4" or something). Webrunner 18:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC) reply

If what was known in the U.S. as "G4techTV" presently existed under a different name, such a setup would be logical. In actuality, the U.S. G4techTV was a distinct entity from TechTV, the original G4 and the current G4 (given the dramatic format change). Our documentation of said entity should not be merged into another article. — David Levy 18:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I was under the impression that the dramatic format change (which happened gradually from the forming of the network t to late 2006, culminating in the announcement in october) did not coincide with the renaming of the channel back to G4 (which was in February specifically). The renaming of the network was certainly PART of it, but there is no distinction from the day before it was G4 to the day after. You can say that it's a symbolic distinction, but that isn't what the articles are supposed to be about. G4TechTV and the early-2006 G4TV are the same network. The distinction is between the early 2006 and mid 2006 G4s. Webrunner 15:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I wasn't implying that the dramatic format change occurred overnight. My point is that the format that existed when the "G4techTV" name was in use differs substantially from the TechTV format, the pre-merger G4 format, and the G4 format that currently exists.

You're correct that there was a period in which the name "G4" was used in conjunction with the same format that previously had been designated "G4techTV," but that doesn't negate the historical significance of the controversial merger that resulted in the existence of G4techTV. When someone types "G4techTV," there is not an overwhelmingly greater likelihood that he/she is searching for one nation's version of the channel rather than the other.

Another way to explain this is to list the following entities:

• TechTV (merged with G4 to form G4techTV)
• Original G4 (merged with TechTV to form G4techTV)
• G4techTV (eventually renamed "G4")
• Current G4 (new format)

In other words, we should have a standalone article for the entity displayed in bold, and "G4techTV" is the name most commonly used to describe it. If anything, the original and current G4 channels should be split into two separate articles. — David Levy 17:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm not saying that any of this stuff isn't important, I'm saying that there's a problem with your entity split. Here's how I see it:

• TechTV (Original)
• TechTV Canada
• G4 (Original)
• G4TechTV (Merged)
• G4TechTV (Canada Format Change)
• G4 (G4TechTV Merged Renamed)
• G4 (Format Change)

Do all these deserve their own articles? I'm not sure, but I don't think G4 deserves the G4TechTV article any more, and I think current G4 and G4TechTV should be merged, mostly because the station that G4TechTV was named G4 for a period before the drastic format change. G4TechTV could be a disambiguation page, I suppose, but that doesn't really help the problem truly at hand here, that there isn't and never was ([ [1]]) a station called "G4techTV Canada", there currently isn't a station called "G4techTV" In the US, but the articles are split that way instead of the other way around. If G4TechTV US absolutely has to have an article, it should be G4techTV (United States) or something. Webrunner 19:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC) reply

1. I was referring strictly to the U.S. situation. The Canada situation is far less complicated, given the fact that G4 never existed there and the fact that there has been only one name change (and no reversion to an earlier name). A separate TechTV Canada article isn't out of the question, but there's less practical need for one.

2. The fact that G4techTV was renamed "G4" without an immediate revamp is little more than a technicality. Its history pertains at least as much (if not more) to TechTV as it does to its "G4" predecessor or its long-term "G4" successor.

The bottom line, irrespective of naming, is that the merger-era channel warrants an independent article (IMHO). The most logical, unambiguous term to describe it is "G4techTV." We certainly don't need a separate article for the pre-revamp name change, as this is relatively insignificant and can simply be noted in the same article (just as we note the "ZDTV" → "TechTV" name change in the TechTV article, with ZDTV redirecting there).

3. As stated above, I agree that G4techTV should not belong to the U.S. version's article (which should be moved to G4techTV (US)). It should not, however, belong to the Canadian channel's article, as someone who types "G4techTV" is similarly likely to seek information regarding either (or possibly both). The U.S. version is defunct, but it had far more viewers when it existed.

4. I'm aware that the Canadian channel is registered with the CRTC as "G4techTV," but that merely establishes its official name as far as the Canadian government is concerned. The channel's management has frequently used the name "G4techTV Canada" in an official capacity. — David Levy 20:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I guess it doesn't really matter if it's G4techTV (Canada) or G4techTV Canada, since not even THEY can decide (it's both ways all over the site, among other things). Maybe to keep it in line with the hypothetical new G4 (US) page, it should be parenthetical?)

In terms of the 'overlap', though, I don't think it's an insignificant detail. If we keep the G4techTV (US) article separate because it's being, then it's not really a G4TechTV article any more, it's a G4techTV-and-early-G4 article about a time period and not a specifically named channel. We'd have to be careful to figure out where one article is supposed to begin and one article is supposed to end. We have tthree time periods here: merger->rename, rename->refocus and refocus->present. rename->refocus obviously doesn't deserve it's own article... and you're suggesting to give the merger->refocus it's own article, and refocus->present but split the -names- based on merger->rename and rename->refocus! Plus, right now, the G4 article covers the OLD G4 along with the new G4, and not even as a seperate 'section'! There's certainly more difference between old g4 and new g4 than new g4 and g4techtv.

You know there's something wrong when the most unambiguous term has to be a disambiguation page!

Right now this is what we have:

• G4 (TV channel) - covers the current G4 AND the old G4 mixed up
• G4techTV - covers the part in the middle
• G4techTV Canada - covers the Canadian station
• TechTV Canada - Redirect to G4techTV Canada
• TechTV - article about TechTV.

How about this:

• G4TechTV ->Disambig linking to below two pages
• G4TechTV (Canada)
• G4TechTV (US) - covering the merge up to the rename
• G4 (defunct TV channel?) - covering the original pre-merge version
• G4 (TV channel) -covering the current version with a link to the old version as a disambig line.
• TechTV - cover TechTV, TechTV Canada: maybe redir to TechTV with info about the differences in the station (like Anime Unleashed)

Does this make any sense? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Webrunner ( talk • contribs) 21:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC). reply

That's similar to what I have in mind. Logically, the articles should be broken down based on significant differences other than name changes. Selecting titles is a bit trickier, but we generally attempt to use the name most commonly associated with the subject (appending disambiguation as needed), even when some of information pertains to period in which a different name was used for essentially the same entity. (For example, "ZDTV" and "TechTV" describe essentially the same channel, so we have a single article with the more recognizable TechTV name as the title and ZDTV as a redirect.) While it was known as "G4" for a time, the merger-era channel is best known as "G4techTV." The lines obviously are blurred, however, so we can have some overlap in our coverage.

Here's my proposed setup:

• ZDTV — redirect to TechTV
• TechTV — covering ZDTV, U.S. TechTV and TechTV Canada
• G4 (2002-2004 TV channel)
• G4techTV (US) — covering the channel from the merger to the revamp (including the pre-revamp "G4" name change, which would be noted in the article)
• G4TechTV Canada — covering the channel's entire history (including the TechTV Canada period), but focusing primarily on the period from period from 2004 to the present
• G4 (2005-present TV channel) — covering the channel beginning with the name change, but focusing primarily on the current format
• G4techTV — disambiguation page
• G4 (TV channel) — disambiguation page

Of course, there would be numerous links (of both the inline and "main article" varieties) connecting the various articles. — David Levy 21:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC) reply

(unindent) Two-item dab pages are normally avoided: top-page dabs suffice in that case, and at least 50% searchers will arrive at the correct place (in the dab case, 100% will arrive at the wrong place). The only thing to decide is which of two G4TechTV's are the more likely to be the primary item. Duja ► 13:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Well, G4TechTV Canada is top on Google hits, but that's mostly because there's no American g4techtv site any more (it's all G4). I would argue that Canada wins out, because they're the only thing currently called G4techTV Webrunner 15:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Firstly, the disambiguation page needn't contain only two items. Someone who types "G4techTV" or follows an outdated off-site link to G4techTV might seek information about the current U.S. channel, so that article also should be included. (FYI, some sources—including DirecTV receivers—still list the channel under that name.)

Secondly, I honestly don't believe that we have a primary item. Webrunner's point about the Canadian channel being the only one that currently exists is valid, but this is countered by the fact that the U.S. channel had far more viewers, the fact that it already possesses the G4techTV title (and undoubtedly is linked from outside sites), and the fact that the article about the Canadian channel already has a suitable title lacking parenthetical disambiguation. I don't believe that these factors justify allowing the U.S. channel to retain the G4techTV title, but a three-item disambiguation page seems appropriate. — David Levy 16:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Then the 3 articles should be... G4techTV -- a disambiguation page containing... G4techTV (US) and G4techTV (Canada) 74.109.62.238 18:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I couldn't resist adding this debate to Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars. Congratulations! Duja ► 13:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Why Cheat no longer airing on G4Techtv Canada now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.127.178.158 ( talk) 23:08, 16 February 2008 (UTC) reply

The American Channel, G4tv, no longer produces new shows of "Cheat!" to my knowledge. So G4techTV is no longer airing it by the looks of it. Int X ( talk) 22:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply

From the looks of MCTVs website, G4techTV has been removed from their line-up. Can anyone confirm this? musimax. ( talk) 03:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on G4 (Canadian TV channel). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061028053126/http://www.crtc.gc.ca/ownership/cht27c.pdf to http://www.crtc.gc.ca/ownership/cht27c.pdf

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 by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:19, 6 January 2017 (UTC) reply

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

• G4Canada.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 00:22, 10 August 2022 (UTC) reply