Talk:Verdens Gang

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.

Norway

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles

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.

Untitled[edit]

Why does it say that VG is a "foreign-owned newspaper". It is clearly not the case. It is owned by Oslo-based Schibsted ASA, which has is headquarters, main operations, registration and stock listing in Norway. Whether the stock owners are majority foreigners are irrelevant, that might change from one day to the next, and is the case with most companies listed on Oslo Stock Exchange. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.89.216.16 (talk) 19:56, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Any Norwegian wikipedian out there that can confirm my view of VG being a centre-right newspaper? --83.108.113.42 12:05, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that VG is a centre-right newspaper, yes.

I agree: of all possible (brief and simplifying) charateristics, this seems to be the least wrong. ReidarM 23:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous[edit]

I'd say that both of Norway's largest papers maintain ambiguous right-left leanings. Even the staunchly right-wing Aftenposten has taken to uncharacteristic opinions such as criticism of Israel. Joffeloff 17:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It is very hard to characterize any of the major Norwegian papers. But I would say that if anything, VG traditionally places itself in between Dagbladet and Aftenposten. Naturally, one can argue whether or not this would be centre-left or centre-right or just plain centre. For now, I changed it back to centre-right since that's where the link pointed anyway. Fat Hobbit 01:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems that no one here considers VG a very far right newspaper, so how come the political allegiance notes "Neoconservative"?Larghe (talk) 19:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Silly left/right paradigm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.157.250.206 (talk) 13:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Verdens Gang. 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/20120621045057/http://mediabase1.uib.no/krigslex/v/v1.html to http://mediabase1.uib.no/krigslex/v/v1.html

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) 20:25, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]