Talk:Newspaper/Archive 1

Sections removed

Tang dynasty

I have removed the section that says the Tang dynasty newspapers were "painted on silk." The link to that article says they were "block printed" (not painted) on paper (not silk). Intranetusa 06:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

ETA

I have removed the reference to the separatist movement ETA in Spain and freedom of expression. I found that the example was not appropiate since it was controversial. There are enough examples of governments curtailing freedom of expression to avoid making any reference to a politically sensible issue. There is already a page on the basque country.--- Nacho 82, Nov. 23 2006

Advertisements

Do any newspapers not have advertisements -- is this inevitable?

Some newspapers have editorial but not advertising, and some newspapers have advertising but no editorial. These are called Money Savers, Shoppers, etc. eSun -- Nov. 2, 2002

Rewrites

Warning: I am gonna do some re-writes unless someone has the urge to take it on. There are some things that grate on my nerves here. But I'm lazy. Please someone, take this on.

See also Wikipedia:Pages needing attention - Hephaestos 04:14 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I know about that, but as I said, I'm lazy. especially so now since my vactaion is almost over. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna have to take this on myself anyway, but it distracts me from writing an article about vending machines, of which is still stewing around in my head in the way to present it. I get sidetracked often when I see something that needs attention. Fixing a spelling mistake or placing a comma correctly is ok, but sitting down and doing a complete re-write of something I didn't intend to in the first place just makes me tired. I wanna write what I want to, not fix poor articles, but I can't stand to leave something that is not good enough. OK, all the time I just spent explaining, I could have fixed this article&emdash;but I'm an idiot. Dmsar 04:35 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Newspaper list worldwide

• Newspapers List Worldwide?????????????????

Daily Courant

The first regular English language newspaper, The Daily Courant was published for the first time on March 11, 1702. -- In what city? RickK 04:42 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Timeline

There is a good, brief Newspaper Timeline here, on the website of the World Association of Newspapers (WAN) [1]. I think the statement about the The Daily Courant is erroneous and this brief section should be replaced. There is also a page listing "the world's oldest newspapers" here: [2]. These could be used as reference by someone who wants to update this history. - Tom Arnold, March 11, 2004

Bias

Ironically, recent criticism of American journalism appearing in the early 2000s includes that which says newspapers are too unbiased.

I've never heard of this. I've heard people who won't read the paper because of bias, but people saying newspapers aren't biased? That's just unheard of. MSTCrow 02:42, May 26, 2004 (UTC)

Rewrite needed

Can someone please address this? I've gone back and re-read the "newspaper journalism" section, and I'm thinking it's rather subjective, assumes that all journalism is one large bloc of journalistic methods, and it needs to be removed and given a total rewrite.

MSTCrow 05:36, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

External Link

Friends, I have a nomination for an external link. The Library of Congress recently launched, "Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers." It's a site that allows you to "search and read newspaper pages from 1900-1910 and find information about American newspapers published between 1690-present." It is a great resource for those wanting to learn more about newspapers. What do you guys think? --Thorpus 20:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I'd like to submit an external link for the 'Newspaper' article, under the heading U.S. Newspapers. It's a list of U.S. States, along with the name, web address, and average daily circulation of each state's largest newspaper. The information is relevant and useful to the readers of this wiki article. So I'm seeking approval for this link. Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.139.185.241 (talk) 22:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Newspaper sections

About the newspaper sections listed under the "United States" section: Are sections much different in other countries? Does this belong under "United States"? Maurreen 03:48, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What happened to the history section? It disappeared in mid-Feb. with no note as to why...

Split off student newspaper?

Given that nearly every university has its own, student newspapers in general seem worthy although individuals don't. It woudl also give a good place to redirect to. Thoughts? Dunc|☺ 19:26, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Right now, I think the separate article has too little material to warrant being on its own. If there is going to be a separate article, I think it should focus on topics that are particular to student newspapers (such as censorship in that setting, etc.) Maurreen 21:27, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The future of newspapers

I found this two links relavant [3] and [4]

The Sun

• Is The Sun really considered a newspaper?
  • Don't know about this Sun, but both the Sun and the Sun are definitely newspapers. Interestingly, the latter is a broadsheet but usually considered tabloid journalism. In the Chinese media, broadsheet is usual, even for "tabloid" (extremely sensational) papers.—Gniw (Wing) 22:53, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Technically, yes. If you are a broadsheet-reader who considers The Sun and its ilk to be the gutter press, then you might disagree. — Paul G 18:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• Is it worth mentioning that The Economist considers itself a newspaper rather than a magazine? Src: [5]

IMHO, no. It doesn't fit any of the generally accepted criteria of newspaper, as compared to magazine. I think the term is kept as part of the Economist's quirky personality (god bless it). - DavidWBrooks 13:06, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

WSJ biased

The article states that "The Wall Street Journal has a history of emphasising the position of the right".

This is controversial, for example the wikipedia article on the WSJ itself states that there is a sharp distinction between the news and the (op-)ed pages. While the latter is undoubtedly conservative the former is even referred to as liberal in the article.

At a minimum the comment should be phrased similar to the statement about the NYT: "The New York Times is often criticised for a leftist slant [...]"

I reject that the NYT has a "leftist" slant at all, but that aside for the moment, the WSJ does have a right wing outlook on its editoral pages, but its reportage of news is some of the best in print as far as business news goes. Calicocat 17:32, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Project Journalism

We've undertaken a new project on Journalism, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Journalism and get involved with the discussions and work on this interesting project. Calicocat 17:46, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Herald and Scotsman

I fail to see how the distribution of the Herald and Scotsman newspapers can be described as quasi-national. Unless the fact that Scotland is a nation is being disputed. (Anon)

Maybe we could say something like "the Herald and Scotsman are distributed throughout Scotland but are not usually encompassed by the term national press". There's also the Western Mail in Cardiff for that matter. Barnabypage 20:32, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Inaccuracies

The newspaper timeline is innacurate the "Courante uyt Italien ende Duytschlandt &c." the first Dutch paper was published in Amsterdam in 1618 not 1632 (source: Stephens, Mitchell "A History Of News" New York: Haracourt Brace College Publishers, 1997). As well the first English-language paper was, "Corrant out of Italy, Germany, &c." published in Amsterdam in 1620 it was a translation of the aformentioned Dutch paper (same source)

Canadian newspapers?

I find it highly strange that though there are dozens of countries listed, Canada wasn't in there. Why's that? (Heck, they supply the paper America uses!)

We're waiting for you to do it? - DavidWBrooks 11:01, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

National sections

The newspaper section should be an overview of newspapers, and have links to national sections. Matthew kokai 00:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Most Reputable Newspapers?

Can someone provide a short blurb on which newspapers are most reputable, as in perhaps a list of a few newspapers that would be well worth reading? NY Times is one but a good list would add to this site.

Would inevitably be POV, I fear. I can just hear the comments now: "You only choose the Guardian/Wall Street Journal because you're a commie/fascist..." Barnabypage 16:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Newspaper suppression?

The timeline lists when newspapers were founded, but doesn't mention if/when countries suppressed the publications. Thoughts? Include `censorship' section? GChriss 13:24, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

A censorship section / discussion - even separate article - sounds excellent. Trying to do any kind of timeline of supression would, I think, be incredibly difficult, if for no other reason than it's common for papers to be shut for a while, reopen, be shut again, etc. - DavidWBrooks 19:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Bundles and distribution

I was thinking there should be sections on: 1] Creation Process 2] Printing (through the ages) 3] Distribution (newsies to modern times)

Information I came to this article for were: 1] Standard bundle size, when the standard bundle was established, and how the bundling has changed over time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pathaugen (talk • contribs) 15:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

"Thursday school lunch menus" ?

In rare instances (e.g. Thursday school lunch menus) the advertising may not change from one zone to another, but there will be different region-specific editorial content

What does this mean? I don't understand the example. - SimonLyall 07:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Many US newspapers run the lunch menus for the following school week, so kids can decide whether to take their lunch on Tuesday or buy the pizza, for example. These will differ from town (or school district) to town. Not the clearest of examples, perhaps. - DavidWBrooks 10:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, very strange. I can't think of another obvious example. Perhaps local weather or sports results? - SimonLyall 08:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

History of the newspaper

We have see also History of British newspapers and History of American newspapers, but nothing on general history and no section on it in the article. This needs to be fixed. Here are some sources: [6], [7], [8] - all from a quick Google search.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus . I also missed a history section. --Ben ^T/_C 20:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Would a section here do, or a separate article? I could post something on the early, or even, pre-history of the newspaper. Gun Powder Ma 16:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Added a bunch, including sources. Thanks for the pointer to Stephens - his A History of News is probably a great source. As this article of his points out, history of journalism is quite often parochial, and this article is no exception. We need more on the history of papers outside of Europe/U.S. (and the smattering of China info), ancient history (no one outside of Rome put out news in carved form?), and recent history differing in different places (i certainly hadn't known that circulation was up in parts of the world, but it makes sense). Speaking of China, i suggested merging the Peking Gazette with Kaiyuan Za Bao but now i'm wondering if they were actually two separate publications. Also, there's a huge gap from the early industrial revolution to modern times (impact of the telegraph, anyone? anyone? Bueller?). Clearly, a history of newspapers will need its own page at some point. Also, it's interesting how the online newspapers put the definition into play again. This article may look very different in 20 years... --John_Abbe (talk) 17:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Types of newspaper

The word 'types' can have more than one meaning (especially in newspapers), so I am changing the sub-heading to the above, to avoid confusion. – Agendum 20:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The Economist

I'm surprised there isn't a reference to The Economist, which calls itself a newspaper. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Colours of sports papers

The article suggests that the two sports papers printed on pink and yellow paper led to the sports they reported on featuring clothing of those colours ("were reflected in") rather than vice versa. If, as seems much more likely, the papers' colours are derived from the colours of the clothing worn in the sports, then "were reflected in" needs to be changed to "reflected", or maybe "reflect": surely they still do represent the colours used in the sport, if these or the papers' colours haven't changed? — Paul G 18:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Prestige

Prestige is the standing or estimation in the eyes of people, weight or credit in general opinion. That said, should an encyclopedia say a daily or sunday weekly is more prestigious than a weekly? It is opinion not fact. (Thedudejessemullen 00:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

I think thats right

Press Associations

Does anybody know anything about, or know of a page on wikipedia about national and statewide press associations. Examples would be the WPA (Woming Press Association) or ONPA (Oregon Newspaper Publishers Association), even NNA (National Newspaper Association). I know these organizations have a lot of influence on papers... ad sharing, training, conventions, etc., but I don't have the skills to begin a new page or to do a detailed upload. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thedudejessemullen (talk • contribs) 21:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Questionable content

"However, those Sunday newspapers that do not have weekday editions are not considered to be weekly newspapers,"

According to who? Why would a paper that only comes out on Sunday not be considered a weekly newspaper? A weekly paper by simple definition is a paper that comes out once a week.

(Thedudejessemullen 22:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC))

Good point. I think it was I who added that phrase (long ago) and that I was thinking of ABC's distinction, in the UK, between national Sunday newspapers and local weekly newspapers. (They are treated by ABC as different categories.) It certainly could be phrased better - see below... Barnabypage 00:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Time for a rewrite?

Revisiting this article today, it strikes me that the content is generally pretty good, but the organisation is a bit chaotic. I suggest we need a complete rewrite, starting out with a definition of a newspaper; giving some history; proceeding into a brief account different types; then sectionalising business models, job titles, internationalisation, role of the Internet, etc. etc., but only linking to those topics when they are fully covered elsewhere on Wikipedia.

I can't do this in the next three weeks, but would be happy to do so thereafter. In the meantime - does that sound to other editors like a good path to follow? Barnabypage 00:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Perhaps if you have a coherent plan in your head, as it sounds like you do, you could drop an outline here for others to consider, before starting to rewrite. Or you could create a temporary page and do the rewrite there, then see if anybody has suggestions, before replacing this article with it. - DavidWBrooks 18:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

WW newspaper circulation

I am looking for some data on WW newspaper circulation, but cannot seem to find a consolidated list by country. Could anyone point me in the right direction please? Also if anyone has any data on freepaper ciculation i would be very interested in any stats on that as well. Many thanks, Nacho BCN 10:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Newspapers online

Hello guys,

I am the creator of Newspapers-Toolbar.

This is not just another toolbar, but rather a big change in the way we look at newspapers. 1000's (for real) of newspapers delivered right to your browser - at no cost.

It's a news application, based on Conduit.com's toolbar technology, published on Cnet, ZDnet, NY Times and in plenty of other *quality* application sites.

Will adding it here contribute to the "newspaper" term in Wiki?

To the man in charge here - please consider this addition to the front page, I would rather post the download-link directly in here but I'm not sure if it's allowed.

Regards,

Nir. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rouvio (talk • contribs) 16:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

There is "no man in charge here"; it might be worth your while to spend time seeing how wikipedia works. Usually, however, download links are not placed in articles. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Future of newspapers

With the future of newspapers not only 'cloudy,' but looking increasingly dismal, this article would benefit from a lengthier consideration of trends within old media and new that are affecting the future of the newspaper industry. A recent article from Salon lays out some of the issues, and might provide a starting point for the discussion. [9] MarmadukePercy (talk) 04:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

It's hard to speculate on the future of newspapers because the industry is completely different depending where you are in the world and the size and type of newspaper. Thriving in South America and shrinking (depending on what numbers you look at) in the U.S. Also, most of those articles are opinions on where the industry is going. As things stand I'd avoid adding information about the current trends. They vary drastically and are inconsistent. Thedudejessemullen (talk) 03:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

There are no figures which suggest that the newspaper industry in the U.S. is thriving; the figures only differ, perhaps, on how close it is to going off a cliff. For a much lengthier discussion, you might take a look at the 'lede of this piece' section of the talk page of The New York Times wiki article. [10] Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 03:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

And the latest casualties over one weekend? The Journal Register chain, which filed for bankruptcy, as well as the chain which owns The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Philadelphia Daily News. [11] The body count mounts on an almost daily basis. MarmadukePercy (talk) 05:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Next to go? The San Francisco Chronicle in the lists of closings/sales/bankruptcies. And now word that parent company Hearst may convert its Seattle Post-Intelligencer to a web-only publication that will mostly aggregate links. [12] MarmadukePercy (talk) 20:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, my friend. This page is supposed to be about ways to improve the article. I suggest you add your information about the Journal Register and the SF Chronicle to the article page instead of here. (Maybe you already have; I haven't checked.) Yours sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello. At a time when the newspaper industry faces its direst crisis in decades, this article on 'newspaper' does not do enough to address the state of the industry, which is why I have added these bullets about what's going on out there. I will be adding to this piece in the near future about trends within the industry, and what they say about where it might be headed. Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 23:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Very good. You are absolutely correct, and we all await anything you might do to beef up this article. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The end of the American daily newspaper as we know it? [13] MarmadukePercy (talk) 02:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

This last article from the NYT, and all the other pieces posted by MarmadukePercy here and at the NYT talk page, point out the need for a new article on the sea change affecting print journalism and newspapers. The "Future" section in this article can then become a summary section pointing to the new article. Possible titles: Decline in newspapers, or Future of newspapers. Thoughts? — Becksguy (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Newspaper Crisis in the United States was suggested in requests for new articles. not bad, but not global. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:02, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Percy, I don't know if you read my comment closely. I did not write that the U.S. industry is thriving although I will note that it is still profitable according to the Pew Project Annual Report on American Journalism 2009. I wrote that it is thriving in South America, Brazil in particular. This is an article on newspapers, not just U.S. newspapers. I worry that the additions you want to make are limited to what you have read in entertainment magazines and lack information on non-U.S. markets or even smaller U.S. markets. Weekly newspaper circulations and profits are up in many areas of the U.S. and many small dailies remain stagnant. I think that a new article focusing on the newspaper "crisis" in the U.S. would be better than additions to this article. Thedudejessemullen (talk) 23:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

You suggest I get my news from 'entertainment magazines'? In the past 24 hours, within the United States, this story has been featured on the ABC, NBC, as well as the PBS Newshour, as well as features in major domestic newspapers. I'd suggest you broaden your reach beyond Oregon. Regards,MarmadukePercy (talk) 01:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Meanwhile, not far from Oregon, the change in the business model of American newspapers rolls on. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer slashes almost all its staff, converts to a Huffington Report-style newspaper with blogs and links. [14] MarmadukePercy (talk) 02:35, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess I need to update my profile. I work for a paper in Wyoming now. What I should have said is you are getting your information from major media outlets that are covering the big names that are failing. Also, you just named three U.S. broadcasts, this is not a U.S. Newspaper article. I am suggesting that information for this article should come from peer reviewed studies on media rather than columnists and television or newspaper reporters. I'm not trying to suggest the U.S. newspaper industry is doing anything but poorly, but these wikipedia articles are not the place for speculation on industry trends. Thedudejessemullen (talk) 04:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Meanwhile, not far from Wyoming, staffers of The Rocky Mountain News in Denver, recently shuttered, have elected to try an audacious experiment: if they can gather 50,000 paying subscribers by April 23 -- which would have been the newspaper's 150th anniversary -- they will launch inDenverTimes.com. In a new subscription model, the online journal will offer some news free, while assessing a $4.99-a-month fee for one-year subscribers for features like columns, interactive features, cellphone feeds and content that can be customized by users. [15] The American newspaper evolves, courtesy the staff, and sans the management? MarmadukePercy (talk) 04:58, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Marmaduke, please see WP:TALKPAGE. This page is not a place for editorialising or indeed news updates on the subject of the article - it is a place to discuss improvements/changes to the article. I suspect your time would be much more productively applied in putting together an overview article on the newspaper crisis as Thedudejessemullen suggests above! Barnabypage (talk) 11:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

While I guess I can see how Marmaduke's comments might be seen as editorializing or news updating if taken out of context, in my view they are really about the improvement of the Future section of this article. Each comment is a news update from a good source with a content idea which can be used for expansion and development of that section. He and I had a brief discussion on creating a new article which would be a daughter article to this one. See my comment above from 15:57, 12 March 2009. The only reason I haven't created an article is that we need to decide on a title. I'm thinking of Future of newspapers, since that is more global than one on American newspapers only, and can be expanded as content on newspapers in other countries is developed. If the US section gets overly large, we split again. Or maybe Future of newspapers in the United States, since there are more sources easily available now for that subject, and it might therefore be easier to start. In any case, until a daughter article is created, this is an appropriate place to discuss development and expansion of this specific subject within the general subject of newspapers. As to sources: While scholarly sources are obviously the best, using articles from major mainstream newspapers, such as the New York Times, are also acceptable. As is, for example, Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), other sources from the Columbia J-School, Editor and Publisher, and Project for Excellence in Journalism ([16]) from the Pew Research Center. Lets please assume good faith.— Becksguy (talk) 15:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Future of newspapers is a great article title - I'd say create it, put in a couple of sentences as placeholder with a stub notice, and go for it! - DavidWBrooks (talk) 16:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Seconded - good idea. The challenge may be finding sources on some of the big non-North American/European markets like India, but it'll be an interesting one! We should be careful too not to let it turn into a litany of doom and gloom, lists of closures etc. - we should also look at the things that are being tried/considered to give newspapers a credible future, like all-online publishing and hyperlocal editions. Barnabypage (talk) 16:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I have gone ahead and created Future of newspapers. It's shockingly POV and unreferenced, but at least it gives us something to start from. Barnabypage (talk) 21:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Damn, I was getting ready to do the same when I noticed the link turned blue. Beat me to the punch, Barnabypage :-). Fine, now lets add reliable references before someone speedy deletes it, and lets start to develop it. Also, I think future discussions on that subject should now take place on that talk page. — Becksguy (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

It's already had all the content deleted and replaced with a redirect back to this article(!) - I'll revert that hasty move if you haven't done so already, Becksguy. Barnabypage (talk) 21:58, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the talk page of the new piece is the place for the discussion to continue. Thanks, Barnabypage, for starting this most timely page. I will be contributing. MarmadukePercy (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

The content wasn't deleted, so I AGF reverted. I'm adding references as we chat. — Becksguy (talk) 22:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Why is this page semi-protected? GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The edit summary by User:Prodego was "excessive vandalism" - DavidWBrooks (talk) 20:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I don't see much sign of vandalism now. When did this take place, and was there discussion? Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

---

Nobody has responded to my request just above to show any discussion supporting semi-protection, I have left a note on the page of the editor who instituted the last semi. Since there is no consensus to continue it, I propose lifting the ban immediately. The few vandalism edits which I could find were childish but quickly corrected. Seems to me that an article on newspapers, which are the eyes and ears of a free society, should not be semi-protected except for the gravest of causes. "Semi-protection should not be used as a pre-emptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred." See Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Semi-protection. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:42, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I've lowered it back down again, however, if the activity returns to a high edit-to-revert ratio, it should be reprotected, though with an expiry. –xeno ^talk 19:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

MIssing word in sentence

Large metropolitan newspapers with also have expanded distribution networks and, with effort, can be found outside their normal area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.252.209.89 (talk) 05:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

India

"In India, were Internet penetration is too low as comparable to other developed countries therefore newspaper like Times of India, The Hindu, Hindustan Times etc are the only source of information for rural and urban people." No TV or radio? 86.148.203.75 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC).

presendint theodore roosevelt

theodore roosevlt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.137.138.188 (talk) 00:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Neologism?

Anybody ever heard of a Microdaily? Maurreen (talk) 01:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't heard the term, but I recognise the phenomenon and there are a few non-Wikipedia usages online, e.g. at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb216/is_20_12/ai_n28814633/. I'm not sure it warrants an article of its own, though - probably better touched on in Newspaper. Barnabypage (talk) 10:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I added it to Newspaper and will make a redirect. Maurreen (talk) 14:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

compitition in hindi news paper

i want to know about sales of hindi news papers in new delhi in india. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.153.68 (talk) 04:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Diversity?

Can we add to the page a link to the African American newspapers wiki page -- some of which are going online and surviving despite current circumstances. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American_newspapers —Preceding unsigned comment added by YsobelS (talk • contribs) 17:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Rolled-up newspapers?

Should there be a mention of the common practice of rolling up newspapers to use in corporal punishment (often for dogs)? 174.20.8.221 (talk) 22:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think so - it would just open the floodgates to mentioning the use of newspapers in lighting fires, soaking up spilled liquids, lining drawers, wrapping fish and chips, etc. etc., none of which add much to understanding of the topic newspaper - they aren't used for these things by virtue of their main characteristic of providing news, it's simply that they are conveniently-sized pieces of waste paper. Barnabypage (talk) 11:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Newspaper vendor.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Newspaper vendor.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:32, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

can any one help on this

any can explain me that what are the requirements for a online news paper and magazine. who r the actor and what are the role's of that that actors to develop a news paper and magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.80.55 (talk) 06:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

This question seems more fitting to pose at the reference desk, since this talk page is only for discussions regarding the improvement of the article. It will also increase your chances of getting a correct answer, since the ref desk is populated with keen minds eager to solve a wide variety of problems. Thanks. --Saddhiyama (talk) 08:53, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Lack of global perspective in image selection

Hello. Newspapers have existed worldwide for centuries, so why are 5 of the 8 images in this article related to the United States? It runs contrary to the objectives in WP:WORLDVIEW. There should be a much more varied image selection in the article. Given the many images we have on the Commons related to newspapers, I'm not sure there is any reason why more than one image in this article should pertain to the U.S. and why we can't use images from numerous other countries. I didn't want to go ahead and make any changes, because editors with more background in this article may have ideas themselves as to how best to diversify the images. Cheers, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

No initial feedback, so I went ahead and made some image changes. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Nice stuff - much improved. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Extras

Would be neat if someone could add a bit about extra editions. 96.241.150.64 (talk) 20:53, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Update to current practices

Recommend an update of the Frequency (and perhaps other) section(s).

An example of outdated content: "Typically, the majority of these newspapers' staff members work Monday to Friday, so the Sunday and Monday editions largely depend on content done in advance or content that is syndicated." News in Monday editions is as timely as any other day of the week. Sunday editions can contain as much current news as any other day, or more in sports sections since many sports, e.g. American football, are weekend focused. Electronic communications enable people to work offsite, not in a newspaper office, and to work longer with 24/7 operations for online content. Thanks RaqiwasSushi (talk) 14:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Newspaper. 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/20081029083017/http://advertising.wsj.com:80/rates/index.html to http://advertising.wsj.com/rates/index.html

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} 13:55, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

History

In 1650, the first worldwide daily newspaper was Leipziger Einkommenden Nachrichten , which was published by Timotheus Ritzsch in Leipzig, Germany. 88.70.26.229 (talk) 03:20, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge -- Whats new?^(talk) 00:03, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

---

I propose that Sunday editions be merged into this article. The content at Sunday editions is brief, unsourced since 2012, fails to establish notability in its own right and can better be managed as a short paragraph within this article. -- Whats new?^(talk) 21:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Agree Rjensen (talk) 23:31, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Newspaper. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100310235015/http://www.wan-press.org/article6476.html to http://www.wan-press.org/article6476.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040107070325/http://www.wan-press.org/article2823.html to http://www.wan-press.org/article2823.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120918094825/http://www.naa.org/Trends-and-Numbers/Advertising-Expenditures/Annual-All-Categories.aspx to http://www.naa.org/Trends-and-Numbers/Advertising-Expenditures/Annual-All-Categories.aspx

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) 20:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Lede reduction

The lede section here was far too long. I'ved moved a copy of it to a new "Overview" section, it probably needs to be copy-edited. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:32, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Newspaper. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080410191605/http://www.uni-leipzig.de/%7Ehsk/pgs/jahrbuch/2005/Weber_Strassburg1605.pdf to http://www.uni-leipzig.de/%7Ehsk/pgs/jahrbuch/2005/Weber_Strassburg1605.pdf

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) 15:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

linux

bonjour'&'Bonsoir j'aimerais appliqu§e mon site google sur wikipedia bien a vous cordialement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.240.58.54 (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)