This template was considered for deletion on 2017 May 25. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States This template 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 Television This template 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. For how to use this banner template, see its documentation.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Journalism This template is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles

All of the recent revisions to this box seem to have broken it. I have removed it from one article Good Morning America due to the new version floating in the middle of the text despite the code for it being placed immediately after the info box. When you have a template in use in multiple articles, it is generally good form to discuss major changes first and make sure they won't result in a lot of articles suddenly looking horrible (case in point, see MSNBC Live for how the template now looks) by testing in the sandbox. When this template is fixed, let me know and I'll put it back in GMA's article. AnmaFinotera 00:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for getting it fixed :) I've added it back to the GMA article. AnmaFinotera 09:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC) reply

There was a certain person here who does not believe Imus in the Morning on RFD-TV is notable enough to be listed, and not considered "nationwide." Considering the fact that the channel is on both national satellite providers and about to be added to several of the largest cable providers in America, I believe that he is wrong (and this is understandable considering he doesn't live in the United States, however it is not understandable for him to be making such judgments). If he or anyone else has a stronger case for NOT listing Imus in the Morning, please discuss it here before removing it. JMyrleFuller ( talk) 20:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply

I agree completely. Imus is probably the most politically influential show of the bunch, regardless of RFD. Just ask your congressman, as well as all the cable companies that are in the process of adding RFD solely because of the show. Riphamilton ( talk) 03:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Just because you both very much like the show it does not mean it should be included. My locality is irrelevant as this is about Wikipedia standards and not whether you or I like the show. FBN is a News Corporation channel which is one of the largest comapnies in the world. RFD is a small niche sat channel not very widespread only available on sat and not cable widespread. Before adding it again please gain a WP:Consensus before adding it again. - Mike Beckham ( talk) 08:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply

This has nothing to do with whether or not I like the show (which I do). It is a relevant, legitimate, nationally available morning television program. Those are the criteria. Just as you can make statements about ownership which are largely irrelevant to the argument at hand (whether or not Imus in the Morning is a bona fide, widespread morning television show), so too can I state that Imus in the Morning has a long history on prominent national television on MSNBC for 11 years. While the channel may not be as ubiquitous on cable as some channels, neither is FBN, but they, like RFD, are in the process of adding providers as we speak, and I don't think that "Money for Breakfast" on FBN has the media coverage of a show like Imus in the Morning, either. As for your niche statement. News channels are "niche" channels. Sports channels are "niche" channels. The vast majority of all cable channels in the United States are "niche." I'm not going to add it back immediately, but I think a consensus can be made here that Imus belongs on this list. Normally, I would generally agree that any ordinary RFD-TV morning show would probably not belong here, but Imus in the Morning I believe is sufficiently high profile enough to be included. JMyrleFuller ( talk) 20:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply

I would on top of my other points bring up what makes it a Morning News Program? It is a radio talk show simulcast on Television. Only reason it was listed previously was it was on a News Channel (MSNBC). I don't see how its a Morning News Show anymore. - Mike Beckham ( talk) 11:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply

There is much, much more news on Imus than on the Today show, let's not kid ourselves here. Instead of exclusive interviews with Lindsay Lohan or Prince Harry, he has senators or presidential candidates on who are actually discussing topics relavent to current events. Every hour is led off with McCord doing the news, and now WABC has put live reports in the news updates not only at the top of the hour but during all newsflashes. This is 2 on 1 right now for Imus to be listed in the template, it obviously looks like there's not going to be a clear consensus on a black/white issue (either he's on the list, or not).... therefore, I've requested outside comments. Riphamilton ( talk) 22:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support, news reports are a regular component of the program, politicians and other newsmakers are routine guests. It is available nationwide on RFD-TV and radio stations in major markets. Accurizer ( talk) 00:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Shouldn't shows such as Worldwide Exchange be moved to the "Early morning news programs" template? Because that template encompasses news shows that air before 5:00 a.m. Eastern Time, when that particular show airs. ( Tvtonightokc ( talk) 07:44, 18 April 2010 (UTC)) reply

Should we list Early Today in the template? It doesn't seem fair if we hold cable news to a lower standard then network television in the same template. We list Varney & Company, which currently doesn't have an article, but Early Today is omitted. -- Brian Halvorsen ( talk) 03:47, 12 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Should Sportscenter appear on this list? If Mike and Mike appear from ESPN2, wouldn't it make sense for the signature program to appear? Or does it not appear because the 9EST start for the first live show of day is too late? -- Flyguy33 ( talk) 17:38, 11 May 2011 (UTC) reply

The problem is that SportsCenter airs pretty much around the clock, several times a day, and isn't specifically a morning show, whereas Mike and Mike in the Morning is. J. Myrle Fuller ( talk) 20:30, 1 July 2011 (UTC) reply