Jump to content

Talk:Jewish News Syndicate

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

Hello, anybody hanging around who know if this logo is somehow related to the Jewish News Syndicate? Thank you so much for your time. Lotje (talk) 06:30, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the current logo Lotje - which can be seen at https://www.jns.org/); it's probably an earlier one since it includes the name Jewish News Service. Where did you find it? The first hyperlinks in https://itsgoodtoliveinatwodailytown.com/2013/10/10/david-ad-in-david-daily/ and https://itsgoodtoliveinatwodailytown.com/2013/10/17/russel-pergaments-jewish-news-service-is-totally-old-testament/ (which also includes another earlier logo; click it to zoom in) leads to the current JNS home page. Mcljlm (talk) 02:53, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mcljlm: Thank you ever so much. I found it on Commons:Category:Jewish News Syndicate, I added it to a newly created category. Lotje (talk) 06:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image Search Tool

[edit]

The hyperlink Free Image Search Tool Bohemian Baltimore leads to a blank page. Mcljlm (talk) 13:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial position

[edit]

The lede phrase "While officially nonpartisan, compared to its larger and older competitor, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, JNS is considered to be more conservative and hawkish." is well-supported with RS in the body of the article. @Steven1991:, it does not need references in the lede per WP:LEDECITE. I have attempted to engage with the editor on their talk page, but they deleted my message and refused to engage. If there are specific issues, be constructive and work them out here. Longhornsg (talk) 03:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but they deleted my message and refused to engage.

1. Every user is entitled to remove messages from their Talk page.
2. Removing the message does not equate the refusal to acknowledge.
3. I have read your words, though do not agree. I hope that it clears things. Steven1991 (talk) 03:06, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Editors resolve differences on Wikipedia via WP:CONSENSUS. Please stop demonstrating WP:BATTLEGROUND and do not delete material simply because WP:IDONTLIKE, especially when it comports with WP policy, which is how we edit here. Longhornsg (talk) 03:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop demonstrating WP:BATTLEGROUND

I am explaining my position. Explaining one’s position has nothing to do with the Wikilinked item. Yes, consensus is needed, but it does not imply the unconditional acceptance of every point being raised. It is a free platform and we are allowed to disagree. This is why consensus is needed.

do not delete material simply because WP:IDONTLIKE

I would appreciate if we can stick to WP:AGF as well. Anyway, I would stay out of this article as I have already stated my points. I wish that you could find editors who may be more suitable for handling this. Have a good day. Steven1991 (talk) 03:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]