Talk:Tuff TV

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

Television

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

KKYK/KMYA

I don't think KMYA is a Tuff TV affiliate anymore. From what I heard, it was airing some African music network or something and is now slated to join MeTV. But I'm not sure of that, so I don't want to change the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TripEricson (talk • contribs) 22:33, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of FTA Satellite broadcast on AMC9 (83W)

Tuff TV, as well as PBJ and RTV are broadcast FTA on the AMC9 satellite at 83.0°W but this isn't mentioned. C-band is mentioned for RTV in the article on Luken. Anybody know why?

24.207.196.213 (talk) 03:28, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. However according to ftalist.com, the RTV channel is no longer broadcast over FTA (Free to Air) satellite including Tuff TV. This is also evident by my local TV over-the-air broadcaster no longer repeating the RTV & Tuff TV satellite feeds! :-(

Also, seems a lot of broadcasts are being pulled from satellite recently due to Chapter 11, etc. See FTA_receiver#Controversy ---roger (talk) 00:52, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A quick follow-up, it would appear these broadcasts may still be occurring according to lyngsat-stream.com. ---roger (talk) 01:15, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived 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, vote-stuffing approves notwithstanding, WP:MOSTM and WP:ALLCAPS are clear. -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:13, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tuff TV → TUFF TV – Requesting move to TUFF TV with all caps. TUFF TV is the correct capitalization for the network. Sjmckeeman (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting move to TUFF TV with all caps. TUFF TV is the correct capitalization for the network.

Sam McKeeman, VP Marketing & Brand Development

Oppose the WP:MOSTM and WP:ALLCAPS are clear on cases like this.--174.93.160.57 (talk) 22:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MOS:TM. You're entitled to style the name however you'd like, but we stick to regular English-language conventions. --BDD (talk) 16:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Approve per MOS:TM. MAV TV is a competitor and has their page name in all caps. Sjmckeeman (talk) 23:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Approve per MOS:TM. So do we take a vote? How does this work? 50.73.82.60 (talk) 22:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Not so fast; Sjmckeeman (talk · contribs) and 50.73.82.60 (talk · contribs), both promotional, WP:SPA and WP:COI accounts, are the same user [1]. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 00:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Point being...? How do I get this changed? 174.49.70.62 (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Citing a gideline to support a change (WP:MOSTM) when in fact it is clearly against the change is a bad start and that argument will be rejected for obvious reasons. The guideline calls for standard capitalization and formatting neither of which are the case here. To be frank the only way to get this moved would be to make a better case and to cite a guideline that actually supports your position.--174.93.160.57 (talk) 06:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Removal?

A whole bunch of cited material was just removed from this page, including every reference to Luken Communications, which owns 2/3 of Tuff TV and operates much of the network out of its Chattanooga offices (in conjunction with an office in Atlanta). I tried to revert the changes, but it says there are conflicting edits. Can someone get the proper information back on the page? TripEricson (talk) 00:08, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page fixed

CLOSED

KnoxSat blocked. Nate • (chatter) 04:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I corrected multiple issues on this page. When I found the page it appeared to be highly abused. I organized, updated, and cited new information. All the facts were gathered from affiliated sources and open source information. Please help me prevent further vandalism of this page. KnoxSat (talk) 03:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly have a conflict of interest and said edits have all been reverted. There has been no vandalism and to accuse this page's contributors as such is unfounded and defamatory. This will be your only warning, and I will not be WP:CHILLed by any threats to myself, the same as last time. I have also opened a sockpuppet investigation. Nate • (chatter) 03:17, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.