Talk:Green Bay Press-Gazette

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tone issues[edit]

I am reinstating my edit. Accusation of being negative is simply someones judgement. If an accurate description is thought of as negative that is not my problem. The source is daily readership of the paper.--Cassandra1953 (talk) 05:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reinstated edit (again). Royalbroil seem to want only a sanitised Gannett version of what the GBPG is. If you have a criticism of any facts please give them here. The only thing in my edit which verges on opinion is the reference to boosterism however this can be justified by regular reading of the paper. It is a monopoly (please state its competition if you think it is not) and it is proud of its lack of coverage of anything outside green bay. If you doubt this call the paper - they will happily claim to be just a local paper..--Cassandra1953 (talk) 13:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a discussion at WikiProject Wisconsin to get a wider consensus on the tone. I have worked on tone issues on many articles it is clearly wrong in my opinion. Royalbroil 16:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with RoyalBroil-- the edits by Cassandra1953 are clearly to make a point. In fact, they're pointless. There are very few newspaper markets in the entire United States with multiple newspapers, so the fact that it's the only paper published in Green Bay is meaningless. Besides, being the only paper published in a city doesn't make it a monopoly. I'm sure that people in Green Bay read papers from other cities. Much of the rest of Cassandra1953's contribution is really drivel. The fact that they publish advertising supplements several times a week is humdrum; that's perfectly normal for any newspaper. Cassandra1953 really needs to get out sometime and see what the rest of the world is about so that articles they edit aren't tainted with unrealistic expectations and opinions.12.76.131.106 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 03:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Awards[edit]

Various recent awards for the paper:

  • 2005 APA National Planning Award for a five-part series called "Downtown: Beyond Perception".
  • 2002 APA National Planning Award for a seven-day series called "A Vision for Green Bay."
  • 2000 APA National Planning Award for a seven-part series called "Growing Pains: The Suburbanization of Brown County."
  • November 2000 - Gannett Company third-quarter Top Well Done award in Division II "For coverage of the Green Bay Packers' request to use taxpayer money to renovate Lambeau Field."
  • First-place winner for Editorial, statement of editorial position in the Milwaukee Press Club's 1999 Journalistic Excellence contest: Robert Wiessner, Green Bay Press-Gazette.[1]
  • 2001 Wisconsin Newspaper Association Foundation's annual contest, third place for general excellence for newspapers with a circulation of more than 35,000.[2]
  • 2002 Wisconsin Newspaper Association Foundation's annual contest, third place for general excellence for newspapers with a circulation of more than 35,000.[3]

FWIW, --Dual Freq (talk) 17:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Journal Sentinel staffers win 18 first-place Press Club awards; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Milwaukee, Wis.: May 7, 2000. pg. 035.B
  2. ^ Journal Sentinel wins state awards; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Milwaukee, Wis.: Feb 4, 2001. pg. 03.B
  3. ^ Journal Sentinel takes top honors in contest; VIKKI ORTIZ. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Milwaukee, Wis.: Feb 3, 2002. pg. 03.B

Recall Disciplinary Action[edit]

I have reinstated 223 as the number of Gannett employees threatened with disciplinary action. This number is taken directly from the print edition cited. Editing the number but leaving in the citation is not appropriate. Not sure where the number 25 came from - no citation given.Wickifrank (talk) 16:46, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, 223 is the total number of Gannett employees in Wisconsin; 25 is the number that faced disciplinary action for signing the petition. More widely available source provided. Fat&Happy (talk) 17:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Green Bay Press-Gazette. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:24, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Green_Bay_Press-Gazette&oldid=1207421859"