Talk:Disney+ Hotstar

Alright, one user argued that people searching the old names of the companies JioHotstar & Jiostar means that’s it’s still called and should be officially called Disney+ Hotstar and Disney Star.

“Here is the Google Trends report showing Hotstar as the likely search term for the topic. (PS: colors blue, red and yellow are search terms; green is topic)” - Vestrian24Bio

But, the problem with this argument is that people can search old names all the time and still the company’s current name can be official.

For example, 20th Century Studios has been searched on Google known as its previous name 20th Century Fox. https://trends.google.com/explore?geo=Worldwide&date=today%205-y&q=20th%2520Century%2520Fox%2C20th%2520Century%2520Studios%2C20th%2520century%2520fox%2C20th%2520century%2520studios And yet this article calls it 20th Century Studios.

If users may argue about the 4Kids Entertainment, that’s only because the article mostly highlights and sources the content that 4Kids Entertainment was known as, as an entertainment company before they rebranded into an extremely smaller licensing firm and some assets were sold and rebranded.

JioStar and JioHotstar is still the same as Disney Star and Disney+ Hotstar, but only the names have changed.

This is what I don’t get about the defensive arguments. I still stand by sources. https://youtube.com/UC0PTktRYpZXb6On0_zFKWIg https://indiantelevision.com/mam/sagar-kadam-joins-jiostar-as-senior-director-ecosystem-partnerships/ https://m.economictimes.com/industry/media/entertainment/jiostar-appoints-amit-malhotra-as-head-of-international-business/amp_articleshow/128808251.cms https://www.exchange4media.com/people-movement-news/sania-fazal-joins-jiostar-as-creative-director-brand-solutions-content-partnerships-152300.html https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/reliance-disneys-jiohotstar-invest-444-million-south-indian-content-executive-2025-12-09/ https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=in.startv.hotstar&hl=en_US https://www.jiostar.com/ XyloQuip289 (talk) 17:22, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

There have been four RfCs about this, the most recent ending a month ago. Please see WP:Renominating for deletion#Requested moves and re-open another discussion in sixth months. Consensus was not to move to a new name and saying that the RfC doesn't apply to the title in the body is just circumventing the results. Also, be mindful of canvassing. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:50, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Renaming to JioHotstar, Disney+Hotstar no longer exists as an entity anywhere. AdityaKhanna1 (talk) 18:03, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: to request a page move, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. But note the recent requested move discussion above on the talk page, which found no consensus for this move. Day Creature (talk) 19:20, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Shouls the article still use the name Disney+ Hotstar as the present/de facto name, when the streaming service has formally been JioHotstar for over a year now, and Disney+ Hotstar is not used in any country anymore? Kailash29792 (talk) 01:55, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Generally, best practice is to wait six months after a previous requested move before proceeding with another requested move, especially if on the same topic. The last discussion was almost three months ago, so it'd be best to wait until at least August 28 before opening with another requested move for this article. Red Shogun412 (talk • contribs) 02:19, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

The last "RfC" was actually an unsuccessful RM. And this has less to do with renaming the article (that is an important move to be saved for another time), but more with how to address it. Because some users still use "Disney+ Hotstar" as though it's the present name when it has in fact been dropped. Kailash29792 (talk) 02:33, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

So long as this remains solely for constructive discussion purposes about planning for what direction to take the article, and not as a workaround to start up a "stealth RM" too soon, then that should be fine. Based on editors' previous remarks, it seemed like an implicit consensus was coming around to "Hotstar" as a potential alternative title. If I had to adjudicate, I would be partial to the "Hotstar" title as a good remediation between the competing "Disney+ Hotstar" and "JioHotstar" article titles. But, other, more involved editors might have different perspectives on the matter. Red Shogun412 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

I suppose it would be best to see which name sources mainly use to refer to the service, so we can vet which one is the more WP:COMMONNAME versus the WP:OFFICIALNAME and determine whether enough significant coverage and time has elapsed for that to be re-weighed. If we were to do that, I would propose the lead as follows with Option A: "JioHotstar, formerly and still commonly known as Disney+ Hotstar or just Hotstar in some regions" OR Option B: "JioHotstar, otherwise known as Hotstar or Disney+ Hotstar" (putting the former names in chronological order), for simplicity. I have suggested this wording specifically to address the name discrepancies transparently whilst placing the most recent, officially used name upfront. Many readers are overwhelmingly likely to be looking for an article largely discussing this service to use the current name from the get go, and at this stage, it would be in the best interest to make that change considering it is not just a preferred brand but appears to becoming more commonly acceptable and widely used, even if mainly locally. Especially considering the article presently does not show the Disney+ Hotstar name in the lead for page previews, something that is precluded by the parentheses and should be rectified if we are not moving the article anytime soon. I suggest forgoing the parentheses and potentially name dropping the specific regions where former names are still used, as those can be explained in detail in the rest of the lead and the body of the article as needed. I remain skeptical about whether"Hotstar" alone can be proven as the most common name for the service today even though it is used in other regions, but it is becoming increasingly glaring to have Disney+ Hotstar as the common name when Disney is no longer directly involved and hasn't been for over a year now. Things change, and, as always, consensus can change, too, and it may be time to settle this once and for all, for the good of the article. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 03:02, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

@Kailash29792 is this RFC about the article title or the content? – robertsky (talk) 03:12, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Content. As I mentioned before, some users are still treating Disney+ Hotstar as the present name (see this and this), citing "consensus" or "RfC". My rationale is, decide on moving the title later, first focus on getting the content right. And by "right", I mean use JioHotstar as the present name and Disney+ Hotstar as the historical name. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:21, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

What do we think about potentially splitting off JioHotstar into a separate article dedicated solely to the separate India-only operations (considering that the Disney+ Hotstar/JioCinema merger only applies to the service operating in India), while reorganizing the current article to reflect the historical Hotstar/Disney+ Hotstar operations in countries and regions outside of India? I think this could help us better streamline what each article covers, especially since Disney+ Hotstar has either been folded into just Hotstar (in Canada, the U.K., and Singapore) or has been technically subsumed into Disney+ (in Indonesia, Malaysia, MENA, the Philipines, South Africa, and Thailand)? Red Shogun412 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

I support this proposal by Red Shogun412, I like the idea of separate article while reorganizing the current article to reflect the history. MaximusEditor (talk) 16:35, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

How is JioHotstar notable as a separate entity? --CNMall41 (talk) 16:37, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

I don’t see the point of this, JioHotstar and Hotstar are basically the same thing as such. I don’t think it needs a separate article if it’s about Disney+. There’s already an article for that. “Disney made this global change to streamline its services and make the viewer experience more consistent" the article says. XyloQuip289 (talk) 02:55, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Would be happy to opine here in WP:6MONTHS. Not sure why this is here when you were notified about it and there have now been four failed attempts. This borders on bludgeoning. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:35, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

@CNMall41, are you aware that 6MONTHS is part of the Wikipedia:Renominating for deletion essay? There's no talk about deletion here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Very aware. See the section on "requested moves" in that link. "We have a long tradition that after a WP:RM is closed that it is not re-listed for six months after the last listing". --CNMall41 (talk) 16:23, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:RM is part of WP:XfD, so all guidelines about deletion discussions apply to move discussions as well. Vestrian24Bio 05:49, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

@Vestrian24Bio, what makes you think that Wikipedia:Moving a page is part of the WP:DELETION process? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:01, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

You've linked to Wikipedia:Deletion policy, I'm talking about Wikipedia:Deletion process which includes RM if you would just scroll down that page. Vestrian24Bio 11:21, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Are any of you paying attention to the elephant in the room? It's about seeking consensus to use JioHotstar as the present/de facto name in the lead section, since the name Disney+ Hotstar is dropped! We can care about moving the article later. Please don't say I don't have source that the D+H name is dropped since I cited it here. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:38, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

The deletion process page only says that a discussion to move a page sometimes results in "deletion (e.g. of a redirect or trivial content at the target page name)". It does not say that RM is part of XFD or that the essay about Wikipedia:Renominating for deletion has any bearing on whether this discussion should happen. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:05, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

We're getting hung up on semantics and technicalities again without deliberating actual policies, guidelines, and conventions.... Can we ever keep these discussions on course? I proposed an alternative approach above with Option A or B in how to deal with the wording in the lead without changing the article title because that is a separate discussion that would require yet another RM. That is not what we are discussing here, nor should it be. It would be more beneficial and less WP:BLUDGEONING if others responded civily to said proposals rather than hastily veering the discussion backwards. RfCs cannot decide article titles and cannot be used to circumvent RMs, so stop focusing on that. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 20:11, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

RFCs can be used to settle any content dispute. We prefer that RFCs not be used instead of the RM process under ordinary circumstances, but there is a long history of particularly difficult page moves being advertised through the RFC system. Additionally, requiring an RFC for the text in the article and separately an RM for the page title itself would be a violation of WP:NOTBURO. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:14, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

We are not requiring anything here. We are trying to establish a consensus for the wording. Please familiarize yourself with WP:RFC. Any contentious move would still require a formal RM, regardless of what consensus an RfC produces. This RfC is only about the lead wording, and two proposals have been given yet editors are focused more on the article title. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 20:18, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Trailblazer, it sounds like it might surprise you to learn that I've written parts of WP:RFC. The only reason I'm here is because, during my routine 'clerking' of open RFCs, I ran across an RFC in which editors were asserting that their side should win because of irrelevant and non-existent rules. When such rumors get started, they tend to spread and get twisted via the telephone game, and they cause problems for discussions everywhere. (In fact, the people making such assertions usually 'learned' to do so from someone else.) It's okay if that doesn't bother you, but it bothers me, and that's why I regularly step in to scotch such false rumors. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Yet you and the other editors are focusing on the wrong aspect in this RfC. Yes, they brought up deletion process rules in an RfC about lead wording, which is not relevant. However, my point is this discussion is getting lost on something that is not what the RfC was asking about. I would prefer if we could actually continue this discussion at hand about the lead wording and cross the bridge of a potential retitle when more appropriate, but that is besides the point and scope of this RfC. It is admittedly frustrating that we are once again veering off topic, but that would explain why no consensus or progress has been made in any previous discussion here. I would just like for all editors to constructively engage with the proposed lead wording, considering that is what this RfC is trying to contextualize. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 20:27, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Do you think we should hat the comments about the subject not being permitted to be discussed because of the Wikipedia:Renominating for deletion essay? (I'm willing to do the hatting and deal with the complaints, if you don't want to.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:50, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

No essays are enforceable and I tend not to base any decisions off of them. This discussion should remain focused on what the RfC is asking about, which is how we should handle the wording of the names in the lead. You seem to be missing the point of that. If you have concerns over editorial conduct, then please take that to the proper channels. I see no need in discussing something out of scope of any RfC, and no one is restricting anyone from discussing anything, but diverging a discussion into off topic tangents is not going to be productive no matter the situation. This is just ridiculous. Either respond to what the RfC is actually asking or just move on, please, so this discussion may actually progress. I think you are focusing on something that is not as important for the sake of this discussion. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 23:25, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing: see Wikipedia:Deletion process#Deletion discussion venues, which pretty clearly lists Wikipedia:Requested moves as a deletion discussion venue in the table. Vestrian24Bio 11:29, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

After reading through the thread, I agree with the proposed draft below that updates the name in the lead. I do not have a strong opinion on whether the change should be made now or later. 23impartial (talk) 18:20, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

@23impartial: Any thoughts on my more concise proposed wording above? (It seems to have been overlooked...) — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 20:14, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

I would prefer Option A that you proposed. 23impartial (talk) 21:46, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

I prefer option A, but leave out “still commonly known as”. I don’t think it’s necessary. Other articles like 20th Century Studios don’t have that. XyloQuip289 (talk) 01:08, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your response and input. I concur with that assessment. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 03:37, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Here’s a draft.

JioHotstar (formerly known as Disney+ Hotstar and also known simply Hotstar in Canada, the United Kingdom and Singapore) is an Indian subscription video-on-demand, over-the-top streaming service owned by JioStar.^[a] The brand was introduced as Hotstar for a streaming service carrying content from Disney Star's (formerly Star India) local networks, including films, television series, live sports, and original programming, as well as featuring content licensed from third parties such as Showtime among others. Amid the significant growth of mobile broadband in India, Hotstar quickly became the dominant streaming service in the country.

Quick facts Formerly, Type of business ...

JioHotstar

Logo used since 2025
Formerly	Hotstar (2015–present) Launched in India in 2015 (rebranded as Disney+ Hotstar in 2020) Launched in the United States in 2017 (merged with Disney+ in 2021) Launched in Canada in 2017, United Kingdom in 2018, Singapore in 2020 (still operating as Hotstar in these three countries). Disney+ Hotstar (2020–2025) Launched in India in 2020 (rebranded as JioHotstar in 2025) Launched in Indonesia in 2020, and Malaysia and Thailand in 2021 (rebranded as Disney+ in these three countries in 2025)
Type of business	Streaming
Type of site	OTT platform
Available in	Bengali Bhojpuri English Gujarati Hindi Kannada Malayalam Marathi Odia Punjabi Tamil Telugu Haryanvi Japanese Korean
Country of origin	India
Area served	JioHotstar (only in India) Hotstar (only in Canada, United Kingdom and Singapore) Disney+ (by name, only in Indonesia, Malaysia, MENA, the Philippines, South Africa and Thailand)
Founder	Star India
Industry	Entertainment, mass media
Parent	Star India (2015–2020; of Hotstar) Disney Star (2020–2025; of Disney+ Hotstar and Hotstar (Canada, United Kingdom and Singapore) JioStar (2025–present; of JioHotstar (India) and Hotstar (Canada, United Kingdom and Singapore) The Walt Disney Company (Southeast Asia) Pte. Ltd. (2022—present; of Disney+ (Philippines), 2025—present; of Disney+ (Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand)
URL	https://www.hotstar.com
Commercial	Yes
Registration	Required
Users	400 million (as of 17 October 2025[update])[1]
Launched	11 February 2015; 11 years ago (2015-02-11) (as Hotstar)
Current status	Active

Close

XyloQuip289 (talk) 02:50, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

But, it’s better we wait 6 months. XyloQuip289 (talk) 03:02, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

It's not better to wait six months. We usually change company names on the same day as the official announcement. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:56, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

That is not true. See WP:NAMECHANGES. That is not a definitive or enforceable policy. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 19:14, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

And yet Weight Watchers was moved to WW International on the same day that the corporate name change was announced. It is usual to change corporate names as soon as possible. It doesn't matter if there is a definitive or enforceable policy; this is the community's usual practice. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

Common practices are not mutually exclusive. It does not matter what other articles have done. Consensus must be established for each article individually to determine whether the common name has changed to warrant a move. You have provided no evidence to support any move other than your personal preference, which holds no weight in such matters. This has been discussed many times and no clear consensus has been reached. That is unlikely to change without strong, new information. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 22:39, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't actually have a "personal preference" about whether which name this article should use, either in the title or in the body of the article. What I care about is editors not making up non-existent rules to try to push for the outcome that they want in RFCs. It's very convenient for an editor who opposes a change to say "The WP:UPPERCASE for an essay(!) on a completely different subject(!) says you can't talk about this yet, so we'll just have to stick with my preferred version instead. Those are just our rules!" Well, I'm pointing out that "wait six months" is not one of our rules. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:10, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

I honestly don't care about editorial conduct or reasoning here. See my above comment about keeping this discussion on topic, and see my proposed wording above. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 20:13, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

WW International is also a single name that the company goes by globally. Disney+ Hotstar goes by several depending on the region. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Looking at the list in the infobox here, this doesn't go by "Disney+ Hotstar" anywhere. It appears to go by "JioHotstar", just plain "Hotstar", and "Disney+", but not "Disney+ Hotstar". WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:52, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

WhatamIdoing, exactly! I posted evidence that the name Disney+ Hotstar has been dropped, And I don't understand why CNMall41 still insists on using that as though it's the present name. Kailash29792 (talk) 01:59, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: This "RFC" is written with clear and evident bias. The question posed in an RfC should be neutrally written, not pre-loaded with the reasons why one outcome should be preferred. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:02, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

  Do you have an opinion on what the article should call the subject? WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:02, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

  Not at the moment. The phrasing of the RFC question appears to clearly identify what the person who opened the discussion thinks the answer should be, but I don't yet have a personal opinion of my own. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:30, 29 May 2026 (UTC)