Talk:Standpoint (magazine)

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 September 2021. The result of the discussion was keep.

This page was proposed for deletion by David Gerard (talk · contribs) on 22 September 2021.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Magazines

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Perhaps Orangemike does not follow political magazines and was under the misimpression that this is some sort of non-notable or vanity publication. Perhaps he was merely overhasty . Please note that while this publication is new, it is handsomely funded and the project of a group of distinguished, experienced journalists and that its notability is established by the media attention it is receiving.Elan26 (talk) 16:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Elan26[reply]

The primary use of the word "standpoint" is for standpoint theory, not for this relatively minor magazine. The word should not direct here automatically but, rather, to a disambiguation page. I don't know how to make that happen but I hope somebody with the skills will come along and do it. Thank you in advance!Rentstrike (talk) 05:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Origins[edit]

The origins section sounds rather bias. Rather than discussing the origins from a neutral perspective, it almost instantly dismisses the magazine as a 'right-wing' response to Prospect magazine... sounds rather biased... particularly in the UK where the label right-wing is used derogatively by many. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.154.50 (talk) 20:13, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since « The first issue included [...] articles by [...] Douglas Murray, [...] Jay Nordlinger, Bruce Bawer », 3 far-right autors, and since « The second included an article by Melanie Phillips about the Muhammad al-Durrah incident, claiming the boy was not dead and that it was a "deadly fabrication". » an antisemite (since Charles Enderlin is jewish) conspiracy theory, then maybe calling Standpoint 'right-wing' is a mistake. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:40, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Standpoint (magazine). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080601095321/http://standpointmag.co.uk:80/about-us to http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/about-us

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:28, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it still going?[edit]

There hasn't been a new issue onsale anywhere since Christmas 2020, the stories on the website are mostly getting on for a year old. Has it packed up?
I want to know 'cos the article will need massive updating if the magazine is dead, not just because I liked reading it and want to know if it has a future.Romomusicfan (talk) 00:07, 16 May 2021 (UTC) Yes, nothing about it online...oddly the twitter account is still going, but just referring to old articles, and again without mentioning current status — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.75.244.13 (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, it does look a bit quiescent, doesn't it - David Gerard (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RS coverage[edit]

For a well-funded magazine that claims considerable import, there's a paucity of RS coverage - except for one controversial article in 2008. Are there good sources for anything in the thirteen years hence? - David Gerard (talk) 13:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged for questionable notability. The RS coverage of the 2008 incident is entirely about Nazir-Ali, and all seems to mention the magazine just in passing as the venue where Nazir-Ali said this - David Gerard (talk) 08:50, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the Nazir-Ali section - 0% of the sources actually say anything useful about Standpoint itself - David Gerard (talk) 13:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing no sign that this meets any of the prongs of WP:NPERIODICAL - David Gerard (talk) 17:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Undue emphasis[edit]

This old news, rather inside baseball, and hardly the first thing we need to know in 2021.

Its launch was noted in May 2008; two months later, the magazine's launch publisher lost his appointment and left the title.^[1]^[2]

References

^ McNally, Paul (21 July 2008). "Standpoint launch publisher leaves after two months?". Press Gazette. Retrieved 24 September 2021.
^ "The Feral Beast". The Independent. 23 October 2011. Retrieved 24 September 2021.

— MaxEnt 17:53, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] McNally, Paul (21 July 2008). "Standpoint launch publisher leaves after two months?". Press Gazette. Retrieved 24 September 2021.

[2] "The Feral Beast". The Independent. 23 October 2011. Retrieved 24 September 2021.

[1]

[2]