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

Film: Filmmaking / American This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force. This article is supported by the American cinema task force. Companies Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments California: Los Angeles / Southern California Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by Southern California task force (assessed as Low-importance). United States: Cinema Low‑importance This article 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance). Video games Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games 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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

After Paramount Global merges with Skydance Media both will be defunct making this article obsolete. However, it's clear Skydance will continue its separate production, maybe as "Skydance Pictures." So let's give it's own article like Miramax and Republic Pictures when the time is right. 2601:152:5001:DCC0:8192:4B47:7741:E0DC (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The film production division will probably just be folded into Paramount Pictures since that studio has the name value, just like how Amazon's movies now have the MGM logo on them. Similar thing will likely happen to the TV division. Inpops (talk) 20:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good points. I respectfully suggest that it will be important to keep the Skydance historical info in the encyclopedia. Left Central (talk) 23:25, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went through history of the article, and it used to say "Untitled Steins;Gate live-action series". Even when it's called "Yin-Yang" instead, there's still the citations for Steins;Gate. I'm kinda confused about this edit. 24.152.144.132 (talk) 16:55, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With the FCC approval cleared, shouldn’t we rename this page as Paramount Skydance Corporation rather than just creating a brand now page for it? There is a page for Paramount Skydance Corporation but it is a redirect. How should we deal with this? NevadaExpert (talk) 23:16, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Technically this is not the same company though, right? The former companies cease to exist and a new company is formed. I don't know how it actually woks legally though. Is one of the companies the legal predecessor? Mclay1 (talk) 13:47, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue here has been settled and addressed. This article is remaining as is. NevadaExpert (talk) 15:14, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to explain how it works, New Pluto Global, Inc was used hold Paramount/ NATL Amusement , Skydance Media uses Sub-Merger entity, where Skydance Media, LLC. uses active as Qualified Survivor (single type). This simply means active with same structure before the merger. this means Paramount Skydance Corporation formed, but Skydance Media can exist with same structure as subsidary. Ekki múkk (talk) 13:13, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please establish consensus here rather than edit warring. Consider a requests for comment if need be.

Cheers. --slakr^\ talk / 05:44, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am asking for "Skydance Productions" in the infobox to be removed, as that is the former name of Skydance Media, and there is no evidence that there's units of Skydance Media by either name of "Skydance Pictures" or "Skydance Productions". ClarkKentWannabe (talk) 22:17, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's listed in the infobox as "Formerly". That seems correct to me. In any event this can wait until tomorrow rather than bothering admins over it. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

let's deal with facts as said many times, Skydance Pictures exist, so did Skydance Productions. SKYDANCE PICTURES, LLC (201328810175), SKYDANCE PRODUCTIONS, LLC (201017910076) all active company, Individual JESSE SISGOLD 2900 OLYMPIC BLVD SANTA MONICA, CA 90404. Jesse Sisgold is President of Skydance. Search | California Secretary of State which were Skydance base, this as official we going to get, as from Cal Gov Company Database. Skydance Media still active as Qualified Survivor (single type) (SKYDANCE MEDIA, LLC (201017610037)), This means still active Holding Company Before the merger. The best solutions is SKYDANCE MEDIA, remains Page name as stil active and histrcial name, in division Skydance Pictures listed as it used legal for films productions. Ekki múkk (talk) 13:08, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no. Skydance Pictures & Skydance Productions is said to be legal & former names of Skydance Media. There is no word that Skydance Pictures is going to be used today. It doesn’t seem to be listed on Paramount’s brands website either.

https://www.paramount.com/about/brands XyloQuip289 (talk) 03:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"is said to be legal" Skydance Pictures, LLC (Entity No. 201328810175) is an active legal company per Search | California Secretary of State which official state biz search & filings. It has an Initial Filing Date of 10/14/2013. Skydance Media, LLC (Entity No. 201017610037) was filed earlier on 06/23/2010. So Skydance Media clearly pre-dates Skydance Pictures. it’s not a former name, of Skydance Media two distinct entity. Skydance Pictures is the production company used for filings, tax credits, and legal compliance. Same setup as Marvel in the UK using MVL Productions UK Limited for production and tax filings, it’s about the legal entity behind the films, not just branding.

Skydance Pictures is internal but active and important. Brands | Paramount chooses what brands to show publicly, so Skydance Media, Sports, and Animation are public-facing, investor-friendly brands. But that doesn’t mean Skydance Pictures isn’t vital. They own more than they show. some brands or entity are internal, not for public display. Personally, I still say the page name should stay “Skydance Media” as that’s historic and active name. But Skydance Pictures should be listed as an active division if editors want to reflect how Skydance does production side. Ekki múkk (talk) 15:35, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article keeps getting changed as Skydance Media not being defunct and is a subsidiary of Paramount Pictures without any sources. It’s not listed on Paramount’s brands page. https://www.paramount.com/about/brands. When you open Skydance’s website. It will say “Skydance is now Paramount Skydance Corporation. As such we have a NEW Privacy Policy and a NEW Privacy Choices Tool, which both apply to this site, and the related tracking technologies we and third parties use.” XyloQuip289 (talk) 15:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

in short terms New Pluto Global, Inc was used hold Paramount/ NATL Amusement , Skydance Media uses Sub-Merger entity, where Skydance Media, LLC. uses active as Qualified Survivor (single type). This simply means active with same structure before the merger. this means Paramount Skydance Corporation formed, but Skydance Media can exist with same structure as subsidiary. Search | California Secretary of State SKYDANCE MEDIA, LLC (201017610037) - still active. not every merger means all combine, really create new holding so hold asset Skydance Media as own sub, Paramount Global/ NATL Amusement asset under it. Internally cheaper use same pricacy across their sites. Ekki múkk (talk) 15:46, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I looked at the website and searched Skydance Television and says that the company is still active although they merged with Paramount Television Studios and that Paramount Skydance Corporation is inactive? These are company filings, they don’t show everything of what happens to a business formation. XyloQuip289 (talk) 15:54, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those are on SEC Fillings which are long, so many cite Deadlines, Varitey who often souce from direcy lySEC or

ompnay itself, often brevity not literal sense. Point of your mergers don't mean literally two die and one exist, many ways merger could just be operations or how they interally see it. or legallt they mergerea new holding owning two subsairary under it. or kill off two for one entity. Paramount Skydance Corporation is new so Cal filings not updated Active. As Paramount Global base delware , HQ in NY. usually take time file to said state and they check it and then put it up. Skydance Televsion ewill exist because has lot legal copyright and contracts, so merger I guess internally. Ekki múkk (talk) 16:35, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• aplogoise that I did correct spelling my reverted, wanted to say that.

Ekki múkk (talk) 16:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Division of Corporations - Filing 3818902 - PARAMOUNT SKYDANCE CORPORATION. as I thought it's also active in Delaware makes sense where Paramount Global was. likley see many months Calfornia branch of PARAMOUNT SKYDANCE CORPORATION

see go inactive to active, Ekki múkk (talk) 16:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]