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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics 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.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports
Assess : newly added and existing articles, maybe nominate some good B-class articles for GA; independently assess some as A-class, regardless of GA status.
Cleanup : * Sport governing body (this should-be-major article is in a shameful state) * Field hockey (History section needs sources and accurate information - very vague at the moment.) * Standardize Category:American college sports infobox templates to use same font size and spacing. * Sport in the United Kingdom - the Popularity section is incorrect and unsourced. Reliable data is required.
* Fix project template and/or "to do list" Current version causes tables of content to be hidden unless/until reader chooses "show."
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
It's become clear with the more recent announcements/reports that this service is effectively a rebranding/relaunch of the ESPN TV Everywhere platform with a DTC offering rather than a truly "new" offering. Given that this is also succeeding ESPN's existing TVE platform (formerly WatchESPN), I think it would make more sense and be less redundant for it to be covered within the context of that service's history instead, rather than place undue weight on Disney's marketing of this as a "new" service. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:09, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely agree. ESPN+ is essentially being renamed (to drop the "+") and getting an additional premium tier. – Brojam (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The tricky thing there is that even today, ESPN announced new programming that is described as being part of "ESPN+" and is launching alongside the revamped streaming offerings. So it seems like, while the current ESPN+ subscription product will become ESPN Select, "ESPN+" will still be a programming strand/stream of some kind, presumably to identify programs that are unique to ESPN's DTC streaming products (as ESPN Select will still carry some ESPN/ABC simulcasts, as ESPN+ has from time to time). All of which to say, it might carry value as a separate programming article even if the discussion of the streaming platform itself is merged into another article. — stickguy (:^›)— || talk || 19:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the "ESPN+ name will remain as a programming strand", then I would be hesitant to merge that article and probably treat it like just another one of ESPN's channels. Zzyzx11 (talk) 20:06, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'd be OK with this. Perhaps – at the risk of bikeshedding – as "ESPN (streaming platform)" or even just "ESPN (streaming)"? It obviously would encompass both TVE and the OTC service, but "WatchESPN" as a brand name isn't really a thing anymore. — stickguy (:^›)— || talk || 19:10, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here’s what I think of this:
1. ESPN+ needs to be a article inside of this article (similar to how other services are like showtime (streaming service) is inside of the bigger paramount+ article
2. WatchESPN is just the tv everywhere service formerly for ESPN, so that covers the cable aspect of this
3. ESPN3 (another service similar to ESPN+) is the cable streaming service so I think ESPN3 needs to merge to ESPN+ and put the overall product into this article and put WatchESPN in this article in the history section Hoopstercat (talk) 23:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: ESPN+ was launched as a standalone offering and has its own history. Showtime, the channel, still has an article for the same reason. "WatchESPN" evolved into what is vaguely promoted on-air with the verbiage "the ESPN app" and still exists as a concept. Your proposed hierarchy of ESPN3 is effectively original research because it combines concepts using personal assumptions. ViperSnake151 Talk 07:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
