Now that Television is on-topic for the Movies site, I move that we include TV completely, and invite people following the TV proposal to come hang out with us.

I noted in another answer that being a Movies site that also allows TV questions doesn't make any sense to me. TV is a huge subject that's equal in scope to Movies. If it's going to be on topic at all, it's got to be included all the way.

The example I used in the other answer was that having a Movies site that is nominally about movies but also allows a few TV questions is like having a French language site that also allows questions about Italian, but it's still mostly about French. You either need two separate sites, or one site that encompasses all Romance languages.

Movies and TV are different languages, but they are related. If they are both going to be encompassed here, they need to have equal focus.

Therefore I move that we:

  • Change the titles of this site to Movies & TV. The url can probably remain movies.stackexchange.com. Or not. We can discuss.
  • Alert the TV Buffs proposal that their topic is now on-topic for our site, and welcome them with open arms.
  • Close the TV Buffs proposal. The Community Team is standing by to do this once it's clear that this is what everyone wants.

[Edited to remove differentiation between TV and Movies with tags.]


4 Answers 4


Yes, we should. There's no reason not to IMHO.


Seeing as the consensus was made to include them as on-topic, I do agree that the merge should happen. I don't think, however, any action should be taken until my fellow moderators have posted here to make it clear that it is a unanimous decision, however, I don't see that being an issue (I like to keep things on record in case of discrepancies).

As far as the URL, I'm fine with keeping it as movies.stackexchange.com as the title of the site should be:

Movies & TV

Obviously let the TV geeks buffs know that they are on-topic, merge, n all that sorcery the SE team does.

If this is the final case then, I'm fine with the separation tags of / but my only concern is similar to the tag, but I'm probably just a worry wart. We should, however, incorporate new ones for

To denote them (and to make the tags more 'meaningful'?).

As far as reality, I still stand by that news should be off-topic as that is too localized. But fine, let the Teen Mom drama come! We'll funnel them into the hot gates where their numbers count for nothing.

  • 4
    Actualy, as mods it's not up to us, it's up to the community. We're just responsible for keeping things civil and organized.
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 19, 2012 at 17:07
  • We still have to make final decisions, however as we had about what? 8 different questions without resolution about TV being on-topic? Sometimes the decision has to come from us if the community is divided, which is also why I like that there are an odd number of us (currently) as putting a final vote is easy.
    – Tablemaker
    Commented Jan 19, 2012 at 17:08
  • 2
    I agree with your proposal here. We made a decision to allow TV questions, the Area51 question suggesting a merge had overwhelming support, and subsequent discussions appear to support the merge since. We should rename the site (but not the URL)
    – iandotkelly Mod
    Commented Jan 19, 2012 at 17:59

There's a precedent: Science Fiction became Science Fiction & Fantasy, early in the beta (the time frame was about the same as here). You can still see the history on meta: Is Fantasy in spec for this site? Should we change the name of this site to include fantasy? When should we change the name to include fantasy? Scifi Stack Exchange is now “Science Fiction & Fantasy”

The displayed name of the site can be “Movies and TV”, to make it clear that TV series are on-topic. (Even if you feel that TV series (episodes) are movies, a redundant title isn't the end of the world; there's a precedent for that too: Unix & Linux, where Linux is (99.99%) a subset of Unix but it's a far better known name.)

The URL isn't likely to change. Science Fiction & Fantasy's URL kind of sucks (scifi doesn't even encompass all science fiction for everyone), but it doesn't really matter, with the title to clarify.

I don't see how TV and movies can be distinguished in tags. What are you going to do with the 99% of questions that have neither? Why would the distinction matter — I doubt many users are going to follow one tag and ignore the other. (For example I don't even have a TV at home, but I wouldn't ignore the tag if there was one.)

  • I agree re: tags. TV series should not be tagged as such - dangerously close to meta-tagging.
    – hairboat
    Commented Jan 19, 2012 at 23:16

I'd rather not change the titles or close the TV-Buffs proposal until we see how the TV-Buffs proposal develops. As soon as it goes beta, we should migrate all TV questions from this site to the new TV site and make them off-topic again to keep concerns separated well.

Until that the TV-Buffs commiters should indeed be invited to post here (but not encouraged to drop their commitment). I'd like to see this TV-ontopicness as a temporary situation (knowing that this period could last a long time, especially since now nobody has a reason to commit for TV-Buffs).

  • 3
    I disagree that TV should be temporarily on topic here. Either it is on topic, or it is not. If it's temporarily on topic, that means it's on topic. The reason for the merge is not "to give TV Buffs somewhere to go in the meantime", it's because there is too much overlap and gray area between the topics for us to be able to easily keep TV out.
    – hairboat
    Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 14:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .