Talk:Warner Bros.

What happened to the Warner Bros. article?

Per this proposal, the former Warner Bros. article was moved to Early history of Warner Bros. Pictures, and then about a third of the text was transferred to Warner Bros. Pictures to resolve a WP:CONTENTFORK on post-1969 history. This page was then recreated as a disambiguation page. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 09:34, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

I Didn't Realise Warner Bros. Main Article to Moved Into Warner Bros. Discovery!! ~2025-42264-71 (talk) 23:41, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Warner Bros. is not diambiguation page!!, is Main Article Page!! Ender V TDPB (talk) 00:20, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

To clarify: "Warner Bros." is not the same as "Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc".  The scope of this article is all entities derived from or named for the original Warner Bros. studio, not all of which are now part of Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. For example, Warner Music Group is currently an independent company that's not part of Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. or Warner Bros. Discovery, but is still within the scope of this article. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 23:24, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. is current de facto legal entity that holds motion pictures operations, they hold copyright from own site to legal entities handle motion pictures internationally, Warner Bros Entertainment UK Limited Warner Bros Entertainment Netherland BV . Warner Bros. Entertainment is legal name usage. Warner Bros. Is their DBA, in UK trademark go to name and address Warner Bros Entertainment, Inc. as owner. here for the USA too - scroll down current owners' information, which list off Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. in addition here link to bunch trademarks which under https://www.trademarkia.com/owners/warner-bros-entertainment-inc this goes from Looney Tunes, motion pictures titles film, WB Logo ect. To understand Warner Bros. Television, Warner Bros Pictures, New Line Cinema are all under this holding co. now that out way issue article is that still listed as subsidiary which is a contradiction to "The scope of this article is all entities derived from or named for the original Warner Bros. studio" either change to brand of Warner Bros. "which make sense in article is all entities derived from or named for the original Warner Bros. studio" however treating as subsidiary then Warner Bros. Entertainment inc, should be it as trade name of entity and own copyright & IP and subsidiary motion pictures. Ekki múkk (talk) 20:38, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Another issue make less sense now parent links of each subsidiary and division links to Warner Bros (brand) current is make less sense, because brand is not entity. Legally, a brand is a comprehensive concept representing a company's intangible assets, while the core legal protection comes from trademarks. Hence, Warner Bros Entertainment inc owns Namesake of Warner Bros. currently this more confusing than anything. Think better Warner Bros Entertainment inc stays as info box listing subsidiaries and saying it company type: subsidiary. Warner Bros. is brand has no legality to it. Before reflect present day owner WB Entertainment. If brand of WB need made better be own page. Similar to how Crunchyroll LLC has own page and Cruncyrroll as brand/ streamer has it own page. As two very different. Ekki múkk (talk) 20:55, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

To keep encyclopedic accuracy, we must distinguish brand (Concept) and entity (legal owner) current links pointing to WB brand page as parent co this legally impossible. WBEI registered owner as show previous messages, and the 100% owner of the subsidiaries (WB Pictures, New Line, etc.). The info box should reflect the legal reality: Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. is the subsidiary of Warner Bros. Discovery that acts as the holding company for these units. Ekki múkk (talk) 21:07, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

You make a good point about the brand being a different concept than the entity. We need separate articles about each. The difficulty is that there are multiple independent corporate entities that have used the "Warner" brand. Currently there are two: Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. and Warner Music Group. In the mid–late 2000s, there were at least five independent Warner-branded entities. There's also the corporate parent Warner Communications/Time Warner/WarnerMedia.

The idea is that this article is about the brand. From what I can tell, Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. was formed as a subsidiary corporate entity in 2003 amid the Time Warner spinoffs of other Warner units. I encourage you to create a separate Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. article if you feel it's worthwhile to have. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 23:38, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

No problem, I wanted to clear up this, because to me all I saw was incorrect factually, I'm very into legal and brand side, but make sense your idea of Brand page, I wanted clear WB ENT and WB brand, so people not confused that all. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. was formed in 2003 but this because of merger of Warner Bros, Inc. Time Warner Entertainment LP, which in turn made Warner Bros Entertainment to hold trademarks, Copyright, Motion Pictures, Games, Watertower music (Music), Television. Idea was no matter if WB get sold WB ENT owns it all not parent company. Ekki múkk (talk) 18:17, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

List of entities derived from Warner Bros. I do recommend put down Warner Bros Ent because it is parent co other media stuff and holds copyright so make sense put there. Ekki múkk (talk) 18:23, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Possible recovery?

I noticed the official Wikipedia article for Warner Bros. is halfway gone, possibly a error. Can anyone swap or move the original text? Thank you, and godspeed. MainRecline (talk) 01:30, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Yeah what happened which make less sense, They created history of Warner Bros Pictures, then converted this page as Brand of Warner Bros, but info box remains saying subsidiary. It currently contradiction. Originally make sense as page visually showing current Warner Bros in motion pictures space under WB Entertainment inc in present day but past shown too. Brand of Warner Bros make less sense because article still list subdairies meaning make less sense now. Ekki múkk (talk) 20:44, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I agree about what you are saying, however, I am NOT blaming myself nor anyone else. All i am saying is that, people must responsible for their actions. I know Warner Bros. is owned by Warner Bros. Discovery, which also owns Adult Swim, CNN, HBO Max, TBS, Cartoon Network, among others. Either this a joke, or a administrator or anyone else can fix any article positions, with the only pros being the Warner Music Group is apart of the Big Three below Sony Music and Universal Music Group, and it's owner is Access Industries which is a American privately-held investment company that has a voting of 98%, and equity of 72%. MainRecline (talk) 16:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Don't worry I talked to them, a bit confusion of legal company and Brand. We agreed makes sense we have WB as brand and WB ENT as own page. This is the same we see HBO (Brand/Channel) page and HBO, Inc. the company operates it. Warner Bros. Trademarks owned by WB Entertainment. As long WB Ent and WB brand clearly different, linking and all info correct then I'm good. Cheers for help and opinion. Ekki múkk (talk) 18:04, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I think an argument could be made that Warner Bros. Entertainment is really the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Warner Bros.", and this article should be at something like Warner Bros. (brand). The thing is, there's currently no article for Warner Bros. Entertainment, though at least eleven of its subsidiaries have their own articles. Or maybe Warner Bros. Pictures is the primary topic, and a Template:Redirect hatnote could be used there.

Also, Warner Bros. Entertainment only includes the Warner Bros. Motion Picture Group, Warner Bros. Television Group, and DC Studios, but not HBO or CNN or any of the other linear networks, and even not some Warner Bros.-branded units like Warner Bros. Games, Warner Bros. Theatre Ventures, Warner Bros. Discovery Global Experiences, etc. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:57, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for late reply, been digging after your findings what I find out about WB games is that has Copyright on site under WB Entertainment. in addition, in its Privacy Policy links back to Warner Bros Entertainment, Inc. digging in on DC World Collide say " © 2025.

WARNER BROS. GAMES LOGO, WARNER BROS. INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT LOGO, WB SHIELD: ™ & © Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. (s25)" What I know from these finding WB Games is in fact under WB Ent, but WBD Marketing as division of consumer section. HBO is two separated entities, Home Box Office, Inc. which is a production entity under WB Ent. while HBO the channel is under Network division. - here found Canada Theatre Museum database list off as Divison of WB Entertainment, to me makes sense as plays are IP of WB Entertainment inc. Ekki múkk (talk) 22:54, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Update

Someone finally added the old with new information about Warner Bros. Thank you for editing the page. MainRecline (talk) 14:29, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

I split the text to Warner Bros. Entertainment, which is a separate topic from the broad-concept article about the brand. It's possible we'll need an RfC to determine which one is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Warner Bros." Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 23:47, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

In California (i think the HQ) pink Floyd done their album cover for wish you were here

am I correct? ~2026-34619-64 (talk) 19:19, 1 August 2026 (UTC)