Talk:Telegraph & Argus

Bradford Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bradford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bradford 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.BradfordWikipedia:WikiProject BradfordTemplate:WikiProject BradfordBradford articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yorkshire Mid‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Telegraph & Argus is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Newspapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers 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.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The T & A an academic journal??[edit]

I see that an academic journal template has been added above. I would like to question this. What is the evidence for formal, peer-reviewed, academic material in the T & A, which is a local newspaper for the general public? --Storye book (talk) 14:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My guess the bot tagged it because the article is incorrectly using template {{Infobox Journal}} rather than {{Infobox newspaper}}. Keith D (talk) 17:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eeep. I did the infobox. Not sure what to do now. Will try to put it right but may fail. Thanks. --Storye book (talk) 18:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Update. Thanks Keith D. I have replaced the infobox and deleted the academic journal template. The infobox could now probably do with further information. I don't live in Bradford, so does anyone know if T & A is a tabloid? --Storye book (talk) 19:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article says it is a tabloid having started out as a broadsheet. Keith D (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Thank you.

In the interest of neutrality or balance[edit]

Re recent edits: negative or controversial statements or information respecting a living individual or existing organisation should be supported by verifiable citations. Thank you. --Storye book (talk) 22:43, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Old T & A building[edit]

I took the photograph of what I understand to be the old T & A building, in response to local elderly people who were there when T & A was in the building. They gave separate and independent information to me about this. I do not live in Bradford and have never spoken to the newspaper staff.

If you have online evidence of the T & A not ever using that building and of T & A using a different building, please give us a link to that evidence, and please identify the previous T & A building. Thank you.--Storye book (talk) 06:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I have now asked T & A editorial staff on the phone about their previous building(s), and they gave the information which I've added under the History subheading. They plan to add a history page to their website, which will hopefully clear up any misunderstandings. Thank you for your patience in this matter. --Storye book (talk) 12:19, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced section added 'History'[edit]

A section was added using unverified anecdotal accounts as a reference. This is unacceptable (I am uncertain if it ever was acceptable, even back in 2011). Shown in this change by Storye book.

It's been allowed to endure since then, with expansions, hence I have tagged it accordingly.--86.29.222.228 (talk) 13:33, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The "unverified anecdotal accounts" from the newspaper staff only apply to the single change I made in 2011, which supplied some rather dry and worthy information about company history, unlikely to offend or mislead anybody. I did ask the staff at the time to put a basic and simple history of the newspaper on their website or in the newspaper so that I could cite it, but sadly they did not do so as far as I am aware (I should add that I have no affiliation with the newspaper or staff).

However the later expansions to the history section are nothing to do with me - and as far as I know are nothing to do with official staff communications - so please delete such antagonistic additions as "sold off piecemeal" and "about one tenth of that figure" which I agree should not remain if not supported by citations. During the long tenure of a previous editor of the newspaper, this article did receive quite a number of antagonistic and uncited edits by a disaffected person or persons, and we cleared them out asap - but I had not noticed those two elements. So please edit the history section as you see fit. Storye book (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that we now have an unregistered editor who may have a conflict of interest here - they appear to be a paid editor, or similar, and some of their edits look like promotion and some bits look like plagiarism, and have no citations. I have reverted some of it. Storye book (talk) 22:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]