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

Business This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I deleted a sentance that speculated that it "probobly" went into bankrupcy because of lawsuits. Wikipedia isn't a place for speculation, if DZ had a history of lawsuits that a lot of people speculate might of led to it's downfall than that would be a great addition to this article, however to simply say that thier bankrupcy was "probobly" caused by lawsuits of kids getting hurt is not. Deathawk 05:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Found an article with real information that's probably of use for this and other CEC articles: [1] --24.23.84.46 05:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At least spell sentence and bankruptcy correctly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.78.84 (talk) 22:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It says their IPO led to them "raising over $50 trillion in one month" thats impossible, also in bankruptcy it says "with debts of up to $3." I doubt with 50 trillion in the bank they couldn't pay that $3 bill...I don't know how to edit this, if someone else could remove those numbers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.193.108.164 (talk) 11:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that in recent months this article has been reworked around a single new location operating under that name. Do we have any reliable source claiming that this is the same business? Otherwise, including that at all beyond a passing mention seems inappropriate. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:59, 30 March 2020 (UTC) And here is coverage noting that it is unclear that this is a revival of the business. I just did a restoration of the lead, but I recommend that we revert the entire article to its January 24th state, with an addition of a single sentence noting the new effort. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have now flagged the section on the new business as off-topic, as this very much looks to be a legally-unrelated business of the same name. --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An IP editor is repeatedly adding in a claim that DZ was the first advertising promoter on Barney & Friends, sandwiching it in with the sourced claim on Sesame Street. This claim is unsourced, and I suspect that the editor may be remembering DZ advertising on the show and just assumed that it was the first. If a source can be found to show both the truth and import of this, great... but on the surface, backing a fairly new show is different from being the advertiser that breaks the decades-long lack of advertising on an historically important show. I have deleted the claim (again) for lack of source, please do not readd until you have a source. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]