Talk:LMN (TV channel)

	Television portal 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).

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force.

Disney Low‑importance

	Disney portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

NPOV

This page isn't even close to NPOV, but it's funny.Carpeicthus 02:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to the formula section, I suppose it's a little biased, but I have observed, and been bored by that formula time and time again. With minor variations, I am certain it would apply to 7/8ths of all Lifetime movies, if not all. 68.107.196.211 22:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As entertaining (and undeniably true) the formula is, until Lifetime releases the formula, it falls under WP:NOR. BillG | Talk 23:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose that makes sense, under the rules, and don't think I'm arguing with you, but do you really think that Lifetime, or any network, will ever come out and say they use formulas in writing their "original" movies? That's kind of funny, they may as well really. Cronos12390 23:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, of course not -- but I suppose that is one of the fundamental flaws of Wikipedia. BillG | Talk 02:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Women-oriented network?

To me it seems more like a "marital infidelity network" that is fun to watch both for women and for men. Most movies there are about marital infidelity.

11 July 2017 rebrand

As of 1200 11 July 2017, the network is now branding itself Lifetime Movies. DavidSteinle (talk) 15:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

listing of movies

Isn't it strange - given Wikipedia's general obsession with the most minute of details - that there is no catalog of Lifetime Movies? There are plenty of movies with no individual article which is fine, but that we can't even link to a catch-all page mentioning them...? 81.229.174.188 (talk) 10:25, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]