Talk:True Crime News Weekly

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 16 November 2021 by reviewer SL93 (talk · contribs).

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal True Crime News Weekly is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

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.

Sourcing[edit]

Some of the sources given seem extremely poor to support BLP mentions of contributors and subjects. In fact several (most) of the sources don't mention TCNW at all. For example the list of contributors was given sourcing that didn't mention the publication at all.

I wonder how much puff is in this piece. --Pete (talk) 06:54, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After examining every claim and supposed source it is clear that much of this article's content is unsupported and much of the BLP material has very poor sourcing.

The Guardian piece is tenuous, the Nine source doesn't exist, and the Crikey piece is the best source and that's not good enough for BLP.

This article seems to be promoting a political opinion blog pretending it is a news site. One step above Twitter.

This article needs some solid sourcing PDQ. --Pete (talk) 07:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]