Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Journalism/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Missing topics

I have a list of missing topics related to media and journalism. I have tried to check if there are any similar articles, but I would appreciate if anyone could have a look at it. Thank you. - Skysmith 12:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Userbox

Here's a userbox I created for this project ... was surprised there wasn't one yet. Use it in good health: {{User WikiProject Journalism}}

This user is a participant in WikiProject Journalism.

_{``` W} i k i _W i s t a h _W a s s a p 07:01, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Internet brigades

I'm not quite sure if this is within the scope of this project, but I thought I'd ask just in case.

Some help is needed in making a potential article over here - about the alleged flooding of the internet with information by secret police used by a few governments (currently the Russians and the Chinese have been alleged of doing this). Some notable sources are available in the references section.

The original article (which was very problematic and was deleted) was purely based on the FSB allegations, and an attempt is being made to make the future potential article more international. It is currently up for deletion review over here, where there is a tie of votes (9 to 9) between those who endorse its deletion and those who want it overturned and relisted.

This is a very controversial topic, but in my view there seem to be enough notable sources to make a decent article out of it, so I hope that someone here may be able to help.

I'm posting this message on several different wikiprojects, in the hope that enough people look at the article that it undergoes the thorough review which it needs. Esn 01:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Template

I have significantly upgrade the project template by adding the rating system and related categories. You will also notice that there is an article quality table on the project page, which is updated by a bot based on the article classifications. I have also assessed a great number of articles, although doing so is a somewhat tedious and monumental process. In doing so, I've nominated a few articles for GA status, although it remains to be seen what will be become of that. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 04:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Journalism expert(s) or reporters needed at LOGRTAC

I have tagged List of groups referred to as cults as being in need of expert(s) in Journalism.

Most of the article is reliable source newspaper references to opinions of specific groups as cults. References are included according to a set of long-debated and highly-consensed inclusion criteria at the top. The article's problem is that it refers to verifiable facts about opinions that interest, concern, and warn the majority, but annoy powerful minorities. But this isn't just about Wikipedia.

Groups referred to as cults always claim that their guru won't be the next one to engage in human rights abuses too similar to slavery, much less become the next insane suicide cult leader. Having enough of mass suicides and frequent reports of abuses, France decided in 1995 to engage in the practice of "cultwatching" (see Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France original in translation). Other Euro governments have done the same (see List of groups referred to as cults in government reports).

The article has been continuously improved in 2-1/2 years, and especially over the last year. One editor called it the best-referenced article in Wikipedia. The central problem is keeping all that reporting work intact.

I seem to be one of the few regular pro-reporting editor remaining there, among a group of editors, some of whom are members of currently or formerly listed groups. Not surprisingly they want the reporting to stop, though to acomplish this, they must invent a stream of seemingly unrelated other objections. These other objections are sometimes based on the tendentious abuse of dictionary definitions of words — by editorial declaration an apple becomes an orange. Occasionally there is railing against newspapers with supposedly biased journalists. It's an eye-roller that you know well, but young LOGRTAC editors who know nothing about news gathering seem ready to believe it after growing up hearing frequent lies about newsgathering as told on TV. Other editors are not necessarily group members, but are philosopically opposed to reporting negative opinions in Wikipedia lists. However, that issue seems to have stood up to a long debate challenge penultimately completed at Wikipedia talk:List guideline.

With the gradual departure of pro-reporting editors, a combination of ignorance and intention could fill the article with POV to balance the imagined reporting bias, which could then lead to the ultimate prize: a successful AfD due to induced POV-magneting. So far the article has had no less than five AfD's, most of which defaulted to keep due to lack of consensus. IIRC, AfD #5 was about 52% keep and 48% delete. Those interested can read a description of the semipermanent LOGRTAC dispute issues at Wikipedia talk:List guideline#To what extent does NPOV apply? (find down to "consensed", beginning with "Let's vet").

I'm not biased against NRM groups or even "cults". According to my calculation from the prevalence at Cult and the number of groups reported in the referred-to lists, perhaps 96-98% of cults don't annoy or frighten their neighbors, and are good enough to stay out of newspapers. Aside from maintaining the reporting as a list and not a POV article (by dropping "List of" from the title), the current task as I see it, is to introduce a criteria inclusion rule to allow linking to statements on groups' own websites, that allows them to refute that they are a cult, as well as any other such statement in reliable source media.

LOGRTAC is a bellwether list article with one piece of a larger problem. I think there is growing general threat to reporting at Wikipedia, from powerful minorities who have discovered that they can stop reporting with persistently tendentious editing activities. Only larger numbers of the ethical journalist and pro-reporting editor majority can stop them.

If most editors here are interested only in articles about journalism, then please tell your pro-reporting editor friends about the problems at LOGRTAC. Milo 04:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Newspaper article guidelines: 2nd draft

Incorporating other users' comments, I've made a few changes to my proposal on writing newspaper articles, which I hope someday to get accepted as an official guideline of this project. The proposal is meant to help new editors write Wikipedia articles about newspapers, and help veteran editors produce standards-based edits.

Thanks a ton to project members Tobogganoggin, IvoShandor and jtowns for commenting on my first draft. I hope to see even more participation in this one. I'm not the only one with experience editing in this project, and I'm depending on my fellow WP Journos to make this guideline truly a consensus-based one. That guideline again is at User:Wiki Wistah/Newspaper articles, or WP:NART.

Thanks again! _{``` W</sub> i k i <sub>W</sub> i s t a h <sub>W</sub> a s s a p <sub>```} 18:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Partisan Newspapers up for possible deletion

The Category:Partisan Newspapers has been nominated for deletion and is currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_23#Category:Partisan_Newspapers. I've just posted my comments; anybody else who cares to put their two cents in should do so ASAP, as the discussion will probably be closed tomorrow. Cgingold 13:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

News bureau

I was writing something about a bureau chief, and couldn't find anything on WP about news bureaus. Did I miss it? Perhaps they're less important now than in the past but they still seem like an important part of how news agencies are organized. If so, and if any sources are available, I think the topic would be worth a stub or perhaps a section of another article, such as News service. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 09:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Category:Journalists accused of fabrication or plagiarism

Category:Journalists accused of fabrication or plagiarism is currently under discussion:

Input from members of this Project would be very useful. The discussion is in its fourth day, so there are 2 or 3 days left to add your comments. Cgingold 12:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Are all dailies notable?

Somehow, without anyone seeming to take notice of it hereabouts, a few editors recently had a highly WP:JOURN-relevant AfD debate regarding the page Caledonian-Record.

The underlying question of the AfD, found here, was whether a 11,000-circ. daily in rural Vermont could be considered "notable" enough to have a Wikipedia article (to break the suspense: the vote was "keep", but only after a few editors expanded a stub to a start and added more than a half-dozen footnotes). I've always taken it as a matter of received truth that all dailies are notable (and have included that, with no opposition, in my suggested guidelines for newspaper articles).

What do you all think? _{``` W</sub> i k i <sub>W</sub> i s t a h <sub>```} 04:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I'm glad it survived, but FWIW, I think it should have been kept whether improved immediately or not. Daily publication seems like a fine threshold of notability, and a stub tag is sufficient to alert editors and readers that the article should be significantly improved. - Tobogganoggin ^talk 03:30, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Asia Insurance Review & MiddleEast Insurance Review

Hi. I got a note in the press queue of OTRS asking for help in getting an article on the above publication into Wikipedia. I explained that we would rather they didn't do it themselves in order to avoid a conflict of interests etc. and that I would let the appropriate WikiProject know that they would like an article writing. So, here you are! Have fun. —Sean Whitton / 13:05, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Links to the magazine sites: [1] and [2]. —Sean Whitton / 14:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Corporate edits to The Banker, Investors Chronicle, Pearson PLC

Hi, this is just a heads up that IP addresses associated with various Pearson subsidiaries are editing Pearson/Financial Times publications. I'm trying to work with these editors to get them to tone down their advertising and marketing speak somewhat, but its a big job and I'd appreciate any help and oversight the WP Journalism team can provide. I've already noticed one item of censorship (reverted) on the Pearson plc page [3]. I haven't had time to check whether other Pearson/FT publications are also affected. Cheers Saganaki- 03:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Also found corporate edits to the following FT titles:

• Nrpn (Nordic Region Pensions & Investment News)
• FDi magazine
• Professional wealth management (a recreated version of Professional Wealth Management which was deleted as a copyvio)
• Pensions management
• FT Mandate
• European Pensions and Investment News
• Pensions week

Saganaki- 03:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: List of journalism books

List of journalism books (via WP:PROD on 4 September 2007) Deleted (PROD by User:Kappa)

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 17:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

ISSN

hi, I am currently trying to expand Prothom Alo. how can I find it's ISSN. --Tarif from Bangladesh 00:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Popular Mechanics

The article on Popular Mechanics should be expanded. It is a large-circulation science and technology magazine and has been in the field for over 100 years. It is currently at stub status, and I believe it merits at least a few solid paragraphs. It has also been covered in other media lately due to its debunking of 9/11 conspiracy theories. -Bonus Onus 23:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

{{Journalism}} template overhaul proposal

I've created a reorganization of the {{Journalism}} template here in my user namespace, mostly to distinguish fields (like fashion and business) from genres (like investigative and watchdog journalism), but also to avoid various redirects, redundancies, and one red link. I've tried to include links to the most general, well-developed articles, because those then tend to include links to articles on various more specific topics. I've also tried to tidy up the visual aspect of the text layout a bit. I realize an organizational overhaul of an article namespace template may be a bit too bold, so please comment here on this talk page or over on the temporary talk page if you have any suggestions or ideas so that I can evaluate whether or not my version is compatible with consensus. Thanks! - Tobogganoggin ^talk 14:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Well folks, it's been several weeks and I've only received one (positive) response on the template talk page, so I'm implementing my changes. Feel free to contact me for any further discussion.

- Tobogganoggin ^talk 01:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of unsafe article

With reference to the entry DJ Magazine, advice is sought on that entry. In the state that the article has been retrieved and recently expanded, this article is no longer fit for purpose. It is so subjective and so poorly referenced, it is now unusable and (it should be noted) it is factually unsafe. In no way can the entry be considered written from NPOV - I propose deletion pending an authoritative contribution.--Buch 12:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion: Firma

Firma at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Firma (5 October 2007 – 11 October 2007) Merge→Globes

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Banner (publishing)

Banner (publishing) (via WP:PROD on 22 October 2007) Deleted

has been transwiki'd to Wiktionary

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion: American Road

American Road at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Road (16 October 2007 – 23 October 2007) Delete

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 13:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:PR, The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power

I have put this article up for a Peer Review, at Wikipedia:Peer review/The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power/archive1. Any suggestions that you might have to help get this article eventually up to WP:FA status would be most appreciated. Thank you. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 16:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC).

Cat for fictional columnists

Do we have any sort of cat for fictional columnists such as Cooper Brown. --Fredrick day (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Lord of the Universe (documentary) on Peer Review

Recently passed as a Good Article, Lord of the Universe (documentary) is now on Peer Review. Your feedback would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lord of the Universe (documentary)/archive1. Thanks, Cirt 19:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC).

Template:Newspaper rationale

Hello everyone, I have just created Template:Newspaper rationale which is a template that will ease in writing fair use rationales on images related to newspapers. It will need to be added to all images in the Category:Fair use newspaper covers. Cheers Ianblair23 (talk) 11:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for this timesaver! - Tobogganoggin ^talk 00:15, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Al Stevens

Al Stevens (via WP:PROD on 19 December 2007) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 13:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Barouyr Aghbashian

Barouyr Aghbashian (via WP:PROD on 19 December 2007) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Notability guideline essay under construction

Input from this project would be useful. Wikipedia:Notability (media) SilkTork *^SilkyTalk 14:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

literary reviews

Should they be tagged under this project?Zigzig20s (talk) 15:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Carolyn Washburn

Carolyn Washburn (via WP:PROD on 27 December 2007) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Mika Edwards

Mika Edwards (via WP:PROD on 25 December 2007) Kept

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Robert Littal

Robert Littal (via WP:PROD on 27 December 2007) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: The Voice, student newspaper published in Rexburg, ID

The Voice, student newspaper published in Rexburg, ID (via WP:PROD on 26 December 2007) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Machinery Outlook

Machinery Outlook (via WP:PROD on 2 January 2008) Kept

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: The Marlin Company

The Marlin Company (via WP:PROD on 5 January 2008) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Nexus News

Nexus News (via WP:PROD on 5 January 2008) Kept

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: The Richmond State

The Richmond State (via WP:PROD on 10 January 2008) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Article for deletion: Greg Felton

Greg Felton at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Felton (31 December 2007 – 8 January 2008) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

ESPN magazine representative wishes to work with interested Wikipedans to expand article

(Cross-posted to several relavant wikiprojects)

A representative of ESPN magazine wishes to work with interested Wikipedians to expand the ESPN The Magazine article. If any Wikipedians are interested in this, please leave a note at Talk:ESPN_The_Magazine#ESPN_magazine. Raul654 (talk) 05:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Article for deletion: The Original Magazine

The Original Magazine at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Original Magazine (3 January 2008)

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Category:Newspapers by city

I've just learned that there is a discussion under way at CFD aimed at coming up with a naming convention for the subcategories of Category:Newspapers by city. It started nearly a week ago, and is nowhere near reaching concensus, so I am going to request relisting for further discussion. It would certainly be good to have input from other folks who are part of this WikiProject. Cgingold (talk) 10:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Typecasting in printing

Not sure if you guys cover "printing"-related topics, but you're listed as the only relevant WikiProject at the article Printing. So --
The article Stereotypy has a disambiguation line "Printers use the term stereotypy to refer to a typecasting process." Typecasting is a disamb page, but has no reference to typecasting in printing. Anybody want to create a stub or redirect for typecasting in printing? Thanks. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 11:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Style Guides

The page Style guide should be Style Guides ThisMunkey (talk) 04:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Arranging the data about journalists so it can be scraped

I know someone who is working on an interesting website which is attempting to collate articles by journalists together called http://www.journa-list.com/

This has a page for each journalist, and they want to make links to the journalist's personal page. Rather than maintaining a database of such, I've noticed there is often a link to the journalist's home page at the bottom of the wikipedia page (eg Rajiv Chandrasekaran)

This is quite common for living people with a public persona. Is there a plan for a computer readable template object that makes the official webpage stick out? Even better, any thoughts about establishing a journalist info-box, as there is for UK MPs (eg Henry Bellingham)? Goatchurch (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Historical Newspapers

Is there an infobox thang for papers which are no longer in circulation? (but are still notable, of course). If anyone has an answer, I would really appreciate it!--DerRichter (talk) 20:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I've always simply used the plain-vanilla {{Infobox Newspaper}} for that. There's a category, "ceased publication", that seems to indicate that this infobox is intended both for active and inactive publications. DerRichter, is there a particular article you're working on for which this infobox wouldn't suffice? _{``` W</sub> i k i <sub>W</sub> i s t a h <sub>```} 03:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Journalistic Novels

There should be included in this discussion, a section for novels of great importance to literature, and indeed to the English language in general. I am refering to Hunter S. Thompson, the author of Fear and loathing in Las Vegas: A savage journey to the heart of the American dream. He is also the creator of the Gonzo style of journalism, he should have his own specific thread dedicated to him. Also, WIlfred Burchett, the first Western Journalist to go to Hiroshima after the Nuclear bomb exploded, he was there three weeks after it happened. He should also have his own thread. --User:MBisanz reinserting comment of User:Tom.mevlie that broke formatting. —Preceding comment was added at 16:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Fear and loathing

I am about to change the wiki article for fear and loathing from a novel to a journalism site, if anyone thinks this is a bad idea for what ever reason, tell me. Tom.mevlie (talk) 08:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Upcoming journalism article at WP:TFA

• Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 4, 2008. Check it out, nice feature for the project. Course it would be helpful for people to put the article itself on your watchlists and watch out for vandalism throughout that day. Cirt (talk) 04:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Old Magazines

Greetings, WikiProject Journalism! I am Cryptic C62 from Wikiproject Chemistry. I went to a massive low-price book sale today and found two old magazines:

• November-December 1978 issue of American Art & Antiques, which includes articles on:
  • American Magazine, Newspaper, and Book Posters of the 1890s
  • Posters of the Nineties
• January 1999 issue of The Magazine - Antiques

Neither of the two magazines appear to currently have articles about them. If any of you are interested in using these magazines as sources, or if you're simply curious, I am offering to ship them at no cost other than the shipping charge. I have a complete list of the articles in each magazine, and will gladly provide any additional information needed. Anyone who is interested should respond on my Talk Page. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 01:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Update on The Journalism Portal

• -- Update: Portal:Journalism has recently become a Featured Portal. All of the articles at Portal:Journalism in the "Selected article" and "Selected biography" sections are of Good Article or Featured Quality Status. Thanks to the efforts of folks from this project, for churning out such great high-quality material! Keep up the great work getting articles to Good Article and Featured Quality Status ! Cirt (talk) 22:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Lord of the Universe at FAC

Lord of the Universe is up at WP:FAC. Cirt (talk) 08:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

List of United States journalism scandals - merger proposal

I put this on the 'To do' list on the main page:

At the moment there are two United States journalism scandals list/articles. The second is the List of United States journalism scandals (which is a more concise list, created after an AfD) - a merge is currently being proposed from the old list to the new. Comments from this project are particularly welcome (and needed, as neither list is well known or well attended). I have "been bold" and put this merge into "To Do", as I believe it is highly relevant to the project, and that the result could have important ramifications... --Matt Lewis (talk) 00:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Lord of the Universe RfC

Hi there, I was wondering if anyone could toss their two cents worth in on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lord_of_the_Universe#Request_for_Comment Please & thank-you. -- Maelefique ^(talk) 18:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion

If I may make a suggestion, I think someone should request a bot go through categories like Category:Free daily newspapers, Category:Newspapers really, and Category:Journalism stubs, etc. tagging all the articles into this project. For some (like the stub cats), the bot could also assess the article as well. The articles in the project are pretty haphazard right now. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 17:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking for an article

Does Wikipedia have an article about the use of "military analysts" in war news coverage, as discussed by the New York Times in this recent exposé? I was looking for something to link to (perhaps a section of a general article on the use of specialist analysts in media, or something about government and military manipulation of the media), but couldn't find anything that discussed this subject. Is there one? Should there be? Is it just a news story, or is there encyclopedic content here? (There are certainly implications for journalistic ethics, and the blogosphere is pushing the story pretty hard, although aside from the New York Times story the mainstream media has been very quiet on it — unsurprisingly, considering that it doesn't cast them in a very good light.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the closest related existing article would be War correspondent. Cirt (talk) 02:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Interested in contributing to Wikinews ?

If you are interested in contributing to Wikinews and have questions, feel free to let me know. We'd love to have more contributors. Cirt (talk) 02:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Are these notable?

The Charleston City Paper and The Charleston Regional Business Journal do not seem notable to me. However, I don't imagine to know what the standard for notability is within the scope of journalism. Someone from this project may want to review the pages and see if they warrant a nomination for deletion. - SCgatorFan (talk) 01:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Well has there been coverage about them in WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources? Cirt (talk) 02:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't pretend to know where to look for secondary sources that make a news publication 'notable'. I am going to propose them for deletion. - SCgatorFan (talk) 17:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start <script type="text/javascript" src="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Omegatron/monobook.js/addlink.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit war at Bronx News

I would appreciate it if another editor could look at Bronx News. Another editor has been deleting references to a 1993 incident in which the newspaper's publishing company was accused of falsifying circulation figures. --Eastmain (talk) 16:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Editors versed in journalism needed for Reliable Sources discussion

A circular debate about the use of opinion quotes from a sales-catalog pseudo-interview, most of it taking place at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Requests for comment/Articles/Vertigo (DC Comics), but with a broader, more potentially far-reaching discussion begun at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources#Question: re: Sales Catalogs.

I'm a longtime professional journalist, and I'm getting the impression that traditional standards for disinterested sourcing are being considered out of step for Wikipedia and that laxer sourcing is OK. Before Wikipedia goes that route, editors with background in journalism and encyclopedic research should weigh in at that Reliable Sources link. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The Cadiz Record nominated for speedy deletion

This article was not tagged as a journalism project page, but I thought I would give notice here anyways. The article is about a weekly paper and consists of only one sentence and an external link. I tagged it for speedy deletion. - PennySpender1983 (talk) 02:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The Daily Show for peer review

I've listed The Daily Show for peer review because I'm really interested in bringing the article up to FA-quality. It was recently listed as a good article, thanks in large part to the fantastic feedback we got through the last PR, and I'd be delighted if anybody was able to offer some comments/critiques/suggestions on how it might be improved further. Thanks! -Shoemoney2night (talk) 06:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Journalism

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Activity level

This project is certainly less active than it has been in the past, but not inactive. I'll try to remember to revamp the project's main page when I get a chance, if things are a bit more user friendly with a few more features that might help out as well. Cirt (talk) 04:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

How does one go about participating in the project? A newbie wants to know.--Tabasca —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabasca (talk • contribs) 00:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

What would you like to do on Wikipedia, Tabasca? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 04:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to help out on some of these articles, as some of them, such as the one entitled "Rewrite man," are in poor shape. However, first I have to brush up a bit on my Wikiskills (such as how to sign my name!). I'd also like to start articles where warranted. Though by nature I am not inclined to write for nothing, this is an interesting endeavor and I'd like to pitch in.--Tabasca (talk) 16:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

On question. I just dived into "David Margolick." Am I supposed to check with this project before editing? Is that the protocol?--Tabasca (talk) 16:24, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you can help me; I vaguely remember that Twain said "no one but a fool ever wrote for free", but I can't find the quote or who said it. I agree a little bit, but on the other hand, look at Western class structure of the last 500 years, and look at how much energy the upper classes have put into trying to give the impression that they don't have to work to get ahead. Writing for free shows a certain easygoingness (OMG you can start by copyediting that, that's not a word), a certain lack of constraints and restraints and love of knowledge for knowledge's sake.

On your questions: you certainly don't have to check with anyone before doing anything, but there's no reason not to use friends when you have them, right? Just keep telling us which articles you're working on, and we'll keep an eye on them. Post questions about specific articles on the talk pages of those articles. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 16:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Dan. I'm getting up to speed on Wikipedia style in the interim. Was that Twain? Not sure. Twain would not have edited on Wikipedia! Take care, --Tabasca (talk) 15:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Soliciting ideas for recruiting copyeditors

The journalism students I knew in college would have been happy for the chance to pick any subject they liked, copyedit articles in that subject, have those articles read by the whole world, and get professional feedback on their work for free. For U.S. students, I'll be happy to check any copyediting they want to do against AP Stylebook, which they're going to be expected to know if they do a lot of writing, and against Wikipedia's style guidelines. Could you guys experiment a bit with asking around and seeing if we can get some people who don't generally consider themselves Wikipedians to volunteer some copyediting time? It could help throughput in moving articles through review processes, a lot. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 04:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Those sound like great ideas, keep us posted. Cirt (talk) 21:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The New York Times has been nominated for a Good article nomination

If anyone has got the time, please review The New York Times for its Good article nomination. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 19:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion notice

I have nominated the article on Shira Levine for deletion, because of its lack of citations. If this nomination is in error (that is, if she is in fact notable), then please post a message to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shira Levine. You may also wish to add a bibliography or footnotes to the Shira Levine article, as well. Thank you. Bwrs (talk) 04:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

FAR David Helvarg

David Helvarg has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Cirt (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Phil Bronstein: Edit needs check

"Funny" edit in Phil Bronstein ("the executive vice president and editor of the San Francisco Chronicle", and "was formerly executive editor of the San Francisco Examiner.")
- On 17 June 2008, User:Chloe702 made an edit with summary as follows: "Changed "Fong" to "Fang," and "sold" to "transferred" and added "politically well-connected." I was the Executive Production Editor of the Examiner at the time. The Fang family used its"
(This is User:Chloe702's only edit to Wikipedia.)
Is any of this correct? Can any of this be cited?
As far as I know, "I'm the source for this info" is not acceptable under WP:VERIFY and WP:OR. -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 21:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1584 articles are assigned to this project, of which 361, or 22.8%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subscribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Listed per User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription, hopefully this will work soon. Cirt (talk) 12:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Westbrook Pegler

I have worked a little on this seeming orphan, trying to verify claims and provide valid references. Might I have some assistance in cleaning it up? Right now it had become primarily a poorly written polemic about this strange character. Thanks! Collect (talk) 01:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Historical Journalism

I noticed the tagging of John Hill (author) with WP Journalism. If people are willing to assess historical journalism figures, will someone add Christopher Smart and Samuel Johnson? Ottava Rima (talk) 12:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Notability

Hi all, is there a notability guideline for newspapers? e.g., newspapers with a circulation above X? If not, is there any interest in establishing such a guideline? I think it would be helpful. -Pete (talk) 22:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

International Herald Tribune and the International Edition of The New York Times

I seem to recall that Gay Talese, in his book about the Times (whose title I always confuse with that of the Graham Greene novel of the whiskey priest) dates The New York Times' involvement with the Trib to the time when Sidney Gruson was sent to Paris by Punch Sulzberger to launch an international edition of the Times. That failed, and Punch approached Jock Whitney about a joint venture, and thus the Odd Couple Parisian collaboration of the Times and the Post was created. Would someone more knowledgeable than I please update the current article to reflect this? You might also write to the Trib and point out that this is rather muddied in the potted history of the paper that appears on its own Web site. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.185.28 (talk) 02:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Geoffrey Dawson

I'm new to Wikipedia, so I hope you'll forgive me if I'm raising this in the wrong place. I was reading the article on Dawson and it refers to a book by Oliver Denton that claims to have evidence that Dawson had links to leading Nazis and used the Times to promote accord with Germany. I can find no trace of this book on Amazon or the British Library catalogue. The wikipedia page on Denton has been deleted.--Jedish (talk) 22:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

request for help with split to new page

Certain claims in connection with George Weller's journalistic work in the Nagasaki area in 1945 are inconsistent with many reliable sources. This gives rise to a significant journalistic issue brought to light in Wikipedia article George Weller[Pulitzer, Polk, Nieman]. New page needed to bring out truth fully on this serious WikiProject Journalism issue. Split section 3 First into Nagasaki off from page George Weller to new page title: First into Nagasaki. [email protected] Ann weller tagge (talk) 18:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Ekstra Bladet

Ekstra Bladet is a Danish newspaper and our article on it could use some help with both NPOV issues and sourcing in general. Any help this WikiProject could give would be most appreciated. --AniMate 20:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Categories for Television Network Journalists

Be advised that there is an important debate under way regarding the use of network-specific categories for television journalists. The CFD would benefit greatly from additional informed views on the subject. If you would like to participate, don't delay, as the discussion is now in its fifth day. Cgingold (talk) 14:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Copyediting

Copyediting bores people to tears. Talking about how to do it is much worse, and proposing a process in which we'll talk about how to do it ... well, if anyone is still reading, I'm shocked, but then again, if you've got that much dedication, you just passed your first test. Please see WT:WikiProject_Featured_articles#Kicking around some ideas about copyediting. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 17:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Notability guidelines

Anywhere I can find notability guidelines on what makes a reporter notable?--Tznkai (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

• Some aspects could be major stories, major reporting or major breakthroughs in public knowledge. I'm not notable, but Lincoln Steffins sure was. Any examples of reporters you are seeking clarification on? -- Guroadrunner (talk) 23:44, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have the paper references used in the article agenda-setting theory

There are a lot of examples of muddled citations in the J-article agenda-setting theory. Whether you agree that we the media set agendas is moot, I'm looking to see if you have any of the original references as I am working to improve refs for this article. Some include:

• Cohen, B. (1963). The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
• Druckman, J., Jacobs, L., Ostermeir. (2004). Candidate Strategies to Prime Issues and Image.

Journal of Politics Vol. 66 No.4 p.1180-1202

• Iyengar, S., Kinder, D.R. (1986) More Than Meets the Eye: TV News, Priming, and Public
• Evaluations of the President. Public Communication and Behavior, Vol.1 New York: Academic.
• Kiousis, S. , McCombs, M. (2003, March). Agenda Setting Study: Agenda Setting effects and strength, MT Journal Nr. p. 142
• Lippmann, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York: Macmillan.
• McCombs, M.E., and D.L. Shaw. (1972) The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 36 p.176-187
• McCombs, M.E., and D.L. Shaw. (1993)The Evolution of Agenda-Setting Research: Twenty-Five Years in the Marketplace of Ideas. Journal of Communication. Vol. 43, No. 2 , p. 58 – 67
• Reiley, K. (2008, Nov.20). The Never-ending campaign. Interview. pg 56
• Revkin, A., Carter, S., Ellis,J., and McClean A. (2008, Nov.) On the Issues: Climate Change. The New York Times.
• Weaver, D.H. (2007, Feb.) Thoughts on Agenda Setting, Framing, and Priming. Journal of Communication. Vol. 57 No. 1, p. 142 - 147

Thank you, Guroadrunner (talk) 23:43, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

about translate

 i think that it can not translated between different languages  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.215.254.217 (talk) 03:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC) 

Stub Biography on Cyrus Townsend Brady

I'm not experienced in working in this medium, however, I have some extremely pertinent information about Cyrus Townsend Brady.

In the stub biography on Brady, it lists him as "a Deacon in the Episcopal Church". I know for a fact that he was more than a deacon -- he had to have been ordained as an Episcopal priest, for in 1910 and 1911 (at least) he was Rector of St. George's Episcopal Church in Kansas City, Missouri.

When I began to search for life dates for the Cyrus Townsend Brady whom I had found as Rector of St. George's in 1911, and found your biography stub, I thought it was merely a coincidence, and that they were two different men with the same name.

However, when I consulted Ancestry.com, I found him listed in the 1910 Census report, with the birth year 1861. His residence is listed as Kansas City, Jackson County, Missouri. There can be no question that the author Cyrus Townsend Brady was also the Rector of St. George's Episcopal Church, Kansas City, Missouri.

He dramatically offered his resignation to the Vestry of St. George's and his position to another priest, The Reverend Julius Augustus Schaad (1866-1938), who had been the victim of a power struggle between William Rockhill Nelson (1841-1915), an important newspaper publisher in Kansas City, and the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church at that time, Daniel Sylvester Tuttle (1837-1923), over the 1911 election of the new Bishop for the [Episcopal] Diocese of Kansas City (now known as the Diocese of West Missouri), Sidney Catlin Partridge (1857-1930). Nelson sold his pew in Grace Church, Kansas City, which was the Parish in which Schaad was the Rector from 1906 through 1911. Nelson also withdrew his financial support of the church's charity and community projects, which forced Schaad to resign as Rector of Grace Church. (Schaad left Kansas City in August of 1911, and went to be Rector of St. John's Episcopal Church in St. Paul, Minnesota. He did not accept Brady's generous offer of the pulpit of St. George's Church.)

The dramatic revelation of these facts, given in a sermon Brady delivered as the Rector of St. George's Church on May 28, 1911, is recorded in "The Kansas City Journal" newspaper for May 29, 1911. ("The Kansas City Journal" was the biggest competitor of Nelson's two newspapers, "The Kansas City Star" and "The Kansas City Times".)

So, based on these facts, I believe the biography stub for Cyrus Townsend Brady should be revised to read "he was also a priest in the Episcopal church."

65.26.50.210 (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Randal J. Loy, Kansas City, Missouri, e-mail: [email protected]

Proposed articles per http://www.cpj.org/deadly/

Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 05:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

List of premature obituaries FLRC

I have nominated List of premature obituaries for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks, where editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:18, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Blogging

Any help with Wikipedia:WikiProject Blogging would be valued. Computerjoe's talk 10:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Ernest Hemingway project?

I am interested in starting am Ernest Hemingway project to improve content related to his life and works. Is there anything like this already going on. Would that be ok to do? kilbad (talk) 21:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

No there isn't as far as I am aware. I don't think there is enough interest for a separate project, but you can create a subproject under this.--Jorfer (talk) 04:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I started a discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#WikiProject_Ernest_Hemingway_project. Perhaps you could share your thoughts there? kilbad (talk) 01:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Media and the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict

Hey all. I contributed a bit to the page Media and the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict a little while back, and always wanted to come back and revisit it after some time had passed and there was a bit more perspective on the situation. Ultimately, altough the main 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict remains far too unstable, I'd like to improve the separate "Media" page for a GA and maybe higher down the road. I was wondering if you guys could suggest for me to any possible sources that might have good information on this subject? Thanks! --Hunter Kahn (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

• Nobody? — Hunter Kahn _(contribs) 01:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Aaron Klein, Joe Farah, and World Net Daily

This issue deals with Aaron Klein. The issue is should we include the followup statement from his employer, Joseph Farah who runs the WP:FRINGE publication World Net Daily?

Klein removed the name of the editor from the article after reports arose on blogs and Wired News that he might himself be the suspended editor described in the story. In an email sent in response to the Wired News article, Klein wrote that the editor "works with me and does research for me." WorldNetDaily's editor-in-chief, Joseph Farah, defended Klein's actions by stating, '"This is what investigative reporters do all the time."

Emphasis mine for the contentious statement, more detailed version with refs is in the article Aaron Klein. Farah is considered WP:FRINGE and it is my contention and others that we should not include his statement. One user keeps adding the material in and SCREAMING bias when it is reverted. Others on the talk page have stated it pretty well, one editor said, "The WND piece was self-serving, deceptive, comes from a party with a conflict of interest, and is demonstrably out of step with journalistic best practice in its claims (Farah's statement is a classic, uhm, untruth). No need for a compromise here -- there isn't anything of substance to compromise on." and another editor says "The employer's self-serving denial has to be treated with care, and we should not republish obviously untrue stuff"

We need a fresh set of eyes, and could use some help from people interested in journalism. Consensus so far is against including the material for reasons discussed on the talk page Talk:Aaron Klein, please weigh in. Thanks! TharsHammar (talk) 04:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Requesting a quick assessment for The Epoch Times

Hello, as Rjanag suggested here Talk:The_Epoch_Times#Should_we_keep_the_tags.3F I'm requesting a quick assessment for The Epoch Times. Your input is much appreciated. Thank You! --HappyInGeneral (talk) 15:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify....we're not looking for an in-depth quality assessment, promotion to B-class, or whatever; we just need someone to do a quick once-over and chime in on whether or not certain cleanup/dispute tags should be removed. Thanks, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:32, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

UK "compact" papers - help/more opinions please

An editor is insisting on removing any reference to the word "compact" from The Independent page, claiming that it is not "neutral" since it is used to suggest "broadsheet quality". While it is usually used to suggest exactly that, I don't quite see how this is a problem. Initially they tried to insist that the page state the paper was a "tabloid", which is clearly inaccurate and just as loaded a term; when I then reformatted the lead so it referred to the paper being published "in a tabloid, or 'compact' format", they took "compact" out again. A quick read of any trade or other sources will quickly reveal that the phrases are used pretty interchangeably to describe the paper's format, with "compact" also being applied directly to the paper itself. I'm slightly at a loss as to what to do, since it all seems a little absurd and surreal to me. No one else has made an issue of this in the last four years. A third opinion from anyone involved here would be welcome. --Nickhh (talk) 19:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Jim Cramer

The CNBC commentator has been ripped widely, perhaps deservedly, but should more than half his frequently vandalized bio consist of criticism/controversy? Perhaps it should, but neutral editors may want to give it a going-over. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 15:44, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't believe it should. This violates WP:POV. The article for Jim Cramer has been repeatedly vandalized and I myself have tried cleaning it up. The problem is there are many individuals who seem to throw their weight around in Jim Cramer's article, refusing to remove or allow the removal of POV-only sections. In my opinion, the article should be deleted and re-created, because while more than half of it is criticism, only a small portion in the other half are balancing the majority POV sections. Since deleting it is unlikely, I can try (again) to neutralize the strong POV sections. Tycoon24 (talk) 00:21, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

merger discussion of Corante and Coranto

I haven't a clue - but others can discuss here at Talk:Corante Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Hard to assess, as neither article has that many sources. Cirt (talk) 17:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Columbia City Paper

Does anyone in this WikiProject want to try and improve the Columbia City Paper article? The article seems to mainly exist for two anonymous editors to battle over who started the paper. There is no notability formally established. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 00:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I am thinking about nominating this article for deletion. Anyone up for improving it before that happens? - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 03:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Al Jazeera

I am writing to notify the project that the GA Al Jazeera has been reviewed as part of the GA sweeps and found to need some work to maintain its GA status. The review can be found here. I am holding the article for a week pending work that needs to be done. If work is not completed then it will be delisted. If you have any questions you can contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 22:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Carrboro Citizen

If anyone can find reliable resources for this, it would be nice; I hate to delete articles about newspapers. - Dank (push to talk) 14:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Progress of resolution of naming issue for placenames in Israel and Palestine

In relation to remedy 13.1 of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/West Bank - Judea and Samaria,
I have requested an update on progress at:

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Israel_Palestine_Collaboration/Placename_guidelines#Current_status

for the proposed guidelines currently located at:

Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Placename guidelines. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Update

Voting or commenting on each segment of the Proposed guidelines in relation to remedy 13.1 of the recently closed West Bank - Judea and Samaria arbitration case. Please comment here on preferred usage in the West Bank/Judea and Samaria area, to determine consensus by July 13th 2009.

The more comments/votes/consensus, the better. We really need to firm up consensus by community input into some of these areas to reduce the drain on admin and editor resources in policing naming disputes. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Reassessment of the Public Ledger article?

Hi everyone. I've been working on expanding the article for the Philadelphia Public Ledger newspaper. Of course there is still more to do, particularly on the Public Ledger Building, but I think we've made enough progress to warrant a reassessment from STUB stage to something else. Could someone take a look at it and update the assessment? Thanks! pmcyclist (talk) 23:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for article on Project Tandem

I'm trying to follow the guidelines to a T, so here goes: I'm a co-founder of this project, Project Tandem and I requested an article be written on the project under Journalists and Journalism, Non-People Topics. The guidelines said to follow up with that request here. I added several independent publication links that profile Project Tandem and hope one (or more) of you wonderful editors/authors might be interested in writing an entry. Thank you so much. Please let me know if anything here is out of line- I really respect Wikipedia and the work that is done here and don't want to hinder it in any way! Thank you!

MsMo000 (talk) 00:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)MsMo000

Gordon Brown GAR notification

Gordon Brown has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Project banner on categories

Does this project place its banner on the category talkpages as well? As an example, should the Category:Newspapers published in India and all its subcategories be tagged with the banner on their respective talkpages? --Siddhant (talk) 11:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Matt Sanchez

Sorry, I was trying to do an AGF rollback with an edit summary rather than the standard rollback. An IP just added some information about that article to our project page, and I reverted, on the theory that people should read the ArbCom case first (see the talk page of the article) to know what they're getting into. The article is still under probation, which means we shouldn't be trying to argue the merits of his case on project pages ... keep it to the talk page of that article, please. - Dank (push to talk) 13:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grief porn

This discussion might be of interest to members of this project. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Newspaper articles

Asking mostly out of curiousity — are members of this project actively picking away at the redlinks listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles/List_of_US_Newspapers? It seems as though very little progress has been made given how long the list has been active. Just wondering whether it's not even known to enough of the right people, or should that particular project be marked historical? Mlaffs (talk) 15:53, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

i just started on Alabama's list added The Daily Home and added the publication date established cat to all the Alabama newspapers already on wikipedia. I'm going to start knocking out the ones i can find on google. Most sadly though will be just small stubs since most of the smaller papers publish little about themselves online surprisinglyTrey (talk) 05:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Notability question

I'm active on the Greek organization project page and usually those keep me pretty busy but i noticed one day that my hometown newspaper was not listed on wikipedia. I created that article and stumbled across the list of newspapers needing created this project maintains. I would like to help and create some for the Alabama. I wanted to ask about notability though since this is always a issue in my little wiki corner. By simply existing and having some circulation is a newspaper or magazine considered notable for Wikipedia and thus suitable for its on wikipedia page? I ask because info on some of these papers like say Daily Mountain Eagle is very limited and or hard to come by. I really want to make sure i don't stub up several of these papers and then get drawn into an argument with some Deletionist on a subject that I'm not very well versed in. Any guidance here? Thanks in advanceTrey (talk) 06:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

RfC on merger of Bristol Indymedia with Independent Media Center

An RfC has been opened - discussion at Talk:Bristol Indymedia. Jezhotwells (talk) 08:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD

The article Glenwood Herald has been nominated for deletion. I'm not an expert on journalism articles on Wikipedia, but I thought that your project might be interested in improving the article and/or providing rationale for deletion.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:15, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Stub tags difficult to find

I recently cleaned up a stub article on a newspaper. When I went to add a stub tag, I couldn't find anything even remotely newspaper-related in the supposedly complete list of stub types. I ended up finding the appropriate tag on your project page, but thought someone here might be interested in adding the journalism-related stubs to the WP:STUBS list. Lyrl^Talk _C 14:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Anna Wintour

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Anna Wintour/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of journalism?

Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 23:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

That might work for journalism... I suppose we have reporters, anchors, editors, newspapers, magazines, broadcast TV, radio, writing style, and so forth. I just started an article about the Journalism Education Association. No idea where that would go in the outline.--Jp07 (talk) 07:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Request for Comment on Outrageous Betrayal

A Request for Comment has started regarding the article Outrageous Betrayal, comments would be appreciated at Talk:Outrageous Betrayal. Cirt (talk) 05:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Relevant AfDs

Two relevant AfDs to this project are Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/60 Minutes and the Assassination of Werner Erhard, and a related article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Self. Cirt (talk) 14:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Latin American Herald Tribune -- something fishy?

Hi, I stumbled across the article on Latin American Herald Tribune, where it is claimed that this is the Latin American edition of the International Herald Tribune. Something isn't quite right about this, since the webpage at www.laht.com makes no such claim, as far as I can see, and the domain is very recent and registered by "Domains by Proxy" and runs of servers in Venezuela (whois here). What kind of multinational corporation would be anonymous about its registration? iht.com, which this article claims as its owner, is registered by a different company and runs off the nytimes.com servers. A man in space (talk) 22:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I remember where the I got the source, so maybe the introduction of this article needs to be re-formulated. The initial article was just a stub anyway. What struck me though is that both the IHT and the LAHT have the same calligraphy in their title pages, with H and T being written the same way. [4] [5] Maybe if you dig deeper you'll find links, but as with any press publication, it's sometimes difficult to determine who exactly the owners are and what socio-political interests they represent. ADM (talk) 22:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm going to remove that stuff until I (or someone else) can find a source. A man in space (talk) 22:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Relevant RSN thread

Please see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#60_Minutes_and_the_Assassination_of_Werner_Erhard. Cirt (talk) 15:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

On the topic of Muckracking

Jackson Northman Anderson (October 19, 1922 – December 17, 2005) was an American newspaper columnist and is considered one of the fathers of modern investigative journalism. Anderson won the 1972 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting for his investigation on secret American policy decision-making between the United States and Pakistan during the Indo-Pakistan War of 1971. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Anderson

Maybe I am showing my age, but Jack Anderson was the one I always tried to read on exposing corruption. But he is not listed on your page on the topic of muckraking. Please consider him and his work.

71.171.70.243 (talk) 22:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Relevant AfD

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moonies. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 07:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

11,263 unassessed articles? Xenobot Mk V can help!

Xenobot can help WikiProjects with many unassessed articles because it can a) check for a {{stub}} or featured template and auto tag as such (e.g. [6] [7]) b) inherit ratings from other WikiProjects (e.g. [8] [9]) WikiProjects can set their confidence levels as permissive or restrictive as they like and exclude certain ratings. For example, A is excluded by default. Some projects have also elected to divide their category list into sections of default importance (see WP:CATS/INDIANA, [10] [11]).

Xeno 5 is alive! AI Performance data CHI 1583 1226 IND 993 735 121 TOR 3925 1991~

xenobot's autoassessment logic only one rating available two or more available auto-stub/inherit conflict notes default Y if only a single rating is available Y if they all agree N do not assess CHI · TOR · BIO · &c. liberal Y if only a single rating is available Y most frequent (highest when tied) SONGS conservative N do not assess Y if they all agree N do not assess IND

If this is something you want to take advantage of, please let me know below or by clicking here. –xeno^talk 20:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Project Banner Importance scale

I have been browsing the talk pages of many bbc news reader as part of the WikiProject BBC and I have found that the WikiProject Journalism banners along the way with a varying amount of importance what is the real importance of the article for the WikiProject Journalism as they portray a mixed picture. Thanks miniwillde 11:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Politeness Police

I would welcome everyone's input on this Policy proposal. Cheers. HarryAlffa (talk) 19:39, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Robert Novak

This article has been placed on hold at GAN, but the nominator appears to have retired. Is there anyone willing to take on the article in order to get it passed as GA? If so, please comment at my talk page or the article talk within 7 days. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 00:06, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

PRESIDENT NELSON MANDELA

He was celebrated this past week and no one has said nothing about it and it is a very vital source need to be discused. the interesting thing about it is that Presidents from all arouind Africa were there. so lets take this theme to the higher standard where people will be able to understand cause recently they know but don't really understand, lt's make it simpler for them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.247.13.29 (talk) 08:40, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Continuing dispute at Erin Burnett

There is a long-running issue on Erin Burnett with a succession of editors (often IPs) adding "controveries" sections about various flaps of one sort or another, most recently about Australian feral camels. There are obvious balance and WP:BLP concerns here. Your input at the talk page is invited, especially if you can expand the general biographical information. Mangoe (talk) 02:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Article request

Could someone check out John Gorenfeld and see if you think he's notable enough to have an article. (Info is easy to find both here, he's mentioned and cited in several articles, and on the web.) I started one a couple of years ago but it was deleted, I think because of a misunderstanding, so I don't want to be involved in the writing of it. Thanks. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Genre?

What genre of type would be of a website that contrains photographs related to current events or news? Saqib ^talk 12:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqib Qayyum (talk • contribs)

I'd just call it a news site. Steve Dufour (talk) 20:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Cook AFD

The page for the above freelance journalist and author is up for deletion here. Unfortunately, given the nature of the field he tends to write about (the Israeli-Palestinian conflict), there's quite a lot of politics involved in the nomination. A more detached perspective, focused on the journalism aspect, might help, if anyone were interested in giving one. He's not super-notable, but I'm not sure he's super-obscure either. --Nickhh (talk) 10:45, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

i.e. ?

I'm pretty sure that the i.e. someone used should be e.g. so unless someone corrects me I'm changing that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.136.130 (talk) 07:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect dates.

Couldn't help but notice that the China newsletter apparantly appeared 71 years after it disappeared. Have no idea which date is wrong, but clearly one of them is!

"A second newspaper, the China News-Letter, appeared in 1793. It was not suppressed, but it was late reporting local and European news and survived until 1722".

Best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.230.232 (talk) 01:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

who is worthy?

I got a message saying that the entry for Elisabeth Rosenthal might not be worthy. I think she is. She's a Harvard Medical School grad, a top New York Times science and environment correspondent, and did pioneering reporting work on disease in China. BUT if other people disagree, please take her entry off.

That said, some journalists, like Francis Moriarty, have had their entries on Wikipedia a long time. He has been a local radio reporter for many years, but does not have the international reach of someone like Rosenthal. If we take her off, then we should take off lesser-known journalists, too.

At the very least, Rosenthal should be added to the list of NYT employees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pumpkin888 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD of interest

The members of this wikiproject may be interested in the AfD discussion for this article. Cla68 (talk) 23:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Robertson v. McGraw-Hill Co.

Pending a decision on the AfD noted above, it would be helpful to get assistance in the article talk space from members of this project. The discussion in Talk:Robertson v. McGraw-Hill Co. concerns the notability of the article, whether other related articles that may be created (there is no article on a much bigger and more significant defamation suit), and whether cuts to the article should be restored or retained. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 15:34, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Stephen Colbert GAR

Stephen Colbert has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Participatory Media, etc.

There seem to be a large number of articles dealing with similar topics. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Participatory_Media. Pcap ping 13:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 02:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The Sun

The Sun redirect is up for discussion on its target, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 January 26

70.29.210.242 (talk) 06:04, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Wallis Time.jpg

File:Wallis Time.jpg has been nominated for deletion. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 05:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for Comment: Outrageous Betrayal

Please see Talk:Outrageous_Betrayal#RfC:_Removal_of_words_Is_and_Was. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 01:57, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-Daily??

I've noticed that several newspapers are described as 'semi-daily' to imply that they don't publish every day. But every dictionary I've consulted states that 'semi-daily' means twice daily. Is there a better term we can use than 'semi-daily'? Ozy42 (talk) 20:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

What you're looking for is "semi-weekly," for papers that publish two to four times a week.

I think that those that publish at least five times a week, such as the Wall Street Journal, are considered dailies. Maurreen (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Delbanco

This is not my area at all, but I am amazed that there is no bio article for Andrew Delbanco. He is Director of American Studies at Columbia University, has written extensively for The New York Review of Books [12] and many other journals, has published several books, including Melville: His World and Work (2006), The Real American Dream: A Meditation on Hope (1999), Required Reading: Why Our American Classics Matter Now (1997), The Death of Satan: How Americans Have Lost the Sense of Evil (1995), The Puritan Ordeal (1989), and William Ellery Channing: An Essay on the Liberal Spirit in America (1981).(list of books). In 2001, he was named by Time as “America's Best Social Critic".See this. A double graduate of Harvard (B.A., Ph.D.), he has also been the recipient of a Guggenheim Fellowship. Only he and Edward Said have won the Trilling Award twice, once for Melville and once for The Puritan Ordeal. See his American Studies faculty page Can anyone put something up? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

1. You just wrote a good stub. You could put something up.
2. I don't see any indication that he's a journalist. Maurreen (talk) 07:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Jean-François Revel

I think i may have met Jean-François Revel on a flight to California in the lat 1960's. the person imet was a french journalist, on his way to California to cover the cas/trial of Sirhan Sirhan. Could this possibly have been Mr. Revel (Ricard)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.45.91 (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't think we can help you with that question. Maurreen (talk) 17:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Conspiracy journalism

I have nominated this for deletion here. Maurreen (talk) 20:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

POV issues with The Mining Journal

Back in 2009 I POV-tagged The Mining Journal on the basis of the passage introduced in these edits. User:Bloopyoop challenged this and proceeded to fill out the article with various people complaining about the paper's bias; based on his edit history he is a single purpose editor who created an account solely to denounce this newspaper.

Upon revisiting the article, my concerns remain. Perhaps it is the midwestern version of the New Hampshire Union Leader but I think it needs some better proof of this than a lot of WP:OR analysis of editorials and letters. I am inclined to re-stubify it, but I would ask that people from this project please take a look at it themselves. Mangoe (talk) 17:02, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

How about we trade off? I'll look into The Mining Journal if you look into Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conspiracy journalism. Maurreen (talk) 17:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

Your project uses User:WolterBot, which occasionally gives your project maintenance-related listings.

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project.

Here is one example of a project which uses User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cricket_articles/Unreferenced_BLPs

There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced living people articles related to your project will be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Journalism/Unreferenced BLPs.

Thank you. Okip 08:06, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. It's unclear where the list is. Maurreen (talk) 00:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

DASHBot only examines already articles already tagged with your wikiproject template, it does NOT tag new articles. If your project is ever interested in tagging more articles with a bot, please see: Category talk:WikiProject tagging bots .

I rewrote the above description, does this help? Okip 05:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. Maurreen (talk) 05:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

The bot will search Category:WikiProject Journalism articles, first run it searched the wrong category. Maurreen, you seem so incredibly active on wikipedia, I see you everywhere! Okip 06:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.

If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 22:49, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Okip, thanks for the info. Maurreen (talk) 05:20, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Quick question. I see that Carl Bernstein and Bill Geist are listed as newspaper reporters. Neither has worked for a newspaper in a while. Should they be on that list? - "CheeseStakeholder" —Preceding unsigned comment added by CheeseStakeholder (talk • contribs) 02:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed merger Music critic into Music journalism

See here. --Smerus (talk) 19:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jean Martirez

Jean Martirez is an an anchor in a major television market. Her article has been nominated for an AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean Martirez. --Morenooso (talk) 06:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

New York Review of Books

Does this distinguish tag make sense? If not, would someone please revert it? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Category question

Reposting a question I posted a while back without proper formatting: I see that Carl Bernstein and Bill Geist are listed in the Wiki categories as "newspaper reporters." Neither has worked for a newspaper in a while. Should they be so categorized? --CheeseStakeholder (talk) 12:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Missing topics

I've updated my list of missing topics related to journalism and media - Skysmith (talk) 13:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

afd notification

I have nominated the article July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike, which is within the scope of this project, for deletion. All interested editors are invited to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike. TomStar81 (Talk) 18:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Category:American online journalists

Category:American online journalists has been nominated at Categories for discussion for upmerging to Category:American journalists and to the newly-created Category:Online journalists. The nomination was relisted today for additional discussion and is now located here. Comments and suggestions which could help to clarify consensus regarding this category would be most welcome. Thank you, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Brian Ross (journalist)

Could someone please take a look at this article? About half of it is about "controversies" which is disproportionate. CheeseStakeholder (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I took a quick glance. I don't know how much attention he has gotten about controversies, to compare with how much other attention he has gotten (that is, off WP for both). Maurreen (talk) 15:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Duplicate category

I'm new here so perhaps I'm missing something, but there is any particular logic behind there being a category for American investigative journalists and just plain "investigative journalists,"[13] most of whom are yanks? CheeseStakeholder (talk) 22:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I just now checked the first 10 articles included directly in Category:Investigative journalists. Six are Americans, four are not. Maurreen (talk) 05:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Then can I assume that the Americans can be safely shifted to "Anerican investigative journalists" and it would be allright? It's scutt work, but as a new guy I will be happy to volunteer for that. CheeseStakeholder (talk) 19:58, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. Also, if you're interested in categories, I've been working to disperse Category:American journalists and would appreciate any help. The category directly contains more than 2,500 articles. Maurreen (talk) 20:15, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I may do that, thanks for the suggestion. I have already shifted all the Americans I could find from the Investigative journalism category into American investigative journalism, and then added project tags to that category where warranted. That has put me on the watch list for several dozen articles, so I can get my feet wet by diving in as necessary. I've been taking a look recently at Gerald Posner, where there is some conflict over possible edits by the subjecxt. Some of you more experienced people may want to eyeball that. CheeseStakeholder (talk) 13:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I checked out the Posner talk page. The situation seems to be in hand now. But I put it on my watchlist. Maurreen (talk) 03:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Maurreen. On the categories, can you suggest avenues of endeavor that can be pursued on that? CheeseStakeholder (talk) 12:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Category work more generally

There's at least a couple of approaches. A category, such as Category:American journalists could be gone through individually.

Or category intersection tools, such as these ([14] and [15]), could be used. For example, these let you see if an article is in a category and a subcategory of the same category. As you noted above, articles should normally not be in both a cat and a subcat. In many cases, if an article is in a subcat, it should be deleted from the main cat.

Is that any help? Maurreen (talk) 15:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

You asked earlier about Carl Bernstein and Bill Geist in the category for newspaper reporters. Sorry I didn't answer earlier.

I think Bernstein definitely belongs in the cat, because he is most known for coverage of Watergate in the Washington Post.

Bill Geist seems to be a toss-up. I think the official line is to categorize just by the most defining four or five categories. But that seems to be seldom followed in practice. Maurreen (talk) 15:17, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, you might want to weigh in either way at a deletion discussion about a cat for american onine journalists -- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 16#Category:American online journalists. Thanks. Maurreen (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Semi-related, do you have any interest in writers more generally? Maurreen (talk) 15:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure, any areas where I can be of help, just le me know. I'll look into the other things you suggested, thanks. I notice you use "hotcat," and I may see if that helps. CheeseStakeholder (talk) 15:18, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I've been using Hotcat only a short time, but it makes things a LOT faster. I have to be careful, though, because it's easy to hit a button accidentally. Maurreen (talk) 18:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Tangent -- writers and book authors

I've also been working to diffuse Category:American writers, which directly contains even more articles than Category:American journalists. But as far as I know, there is not a category for book authors, and I think there should be. What do you think? Maurreen (talk) 18:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I would thinks so. I was surprised that there wasn't. It seems that changing/adding that category on so many hundreds or thousands of articles would be brutal work! CheeseStakeholder (talk) 19:53, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Cambridge Chronicle

I replaced the redirect from Cambridge Chronicle to GateHouse Media with a stub that I hope to expand at least to Start-Status by the end of the day. Please feel free to comment and / or help. --Jordan1976 (talk) 13:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a very good start. Maurreen (talk) 13:45, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Relevant AFD - Everybody Draw Mohammad Day

• Everybody Draw Mohammad Day

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everybody Draw Mohammad Day. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 17:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons

The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 35,715 as of May 1. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously, it just compiles a list.

Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Journalism/Unreferenced BLPs. Currently you have approximately 988 articles to be referenced. Other project lists can be found at User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates and User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects.

Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 16:35, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Maurreen (talk) 16:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Editors here may be able to contribute

Editors here might be able to contribute usefully to an exceedingly long discussion at WT:V about whether editorial oversight is the same as non-self-publication.

All of the reliable sources say that self-publication means that the author is the same entity as the publisher. A pair of admins (with, apparently, absolutely zero knowledge of publishing, and perhaps even less interest in acquiring any knowledge) have decreed that "self-publication" means not vetted by enough layers of lawyers, marketing folks, or other employees, regardless of the identities of the author and the publisher. In practical terms, they want Wikipedia's definition to decree that press releases from multinational corporations, so long as we can assume they were cleared by enough different humans employed in the company's marketing and legal departments, are "non-self-published", and that small newspapers, which only have a few employees, are "self-published", even when any idiot can see that the byline on the story and the publisher's name on the masthead are different.

If you have an interest in this subject, and the patience to explain pretty basic stuff about the publishing industry and publishing law, please comment directly at WT:V.

Additionally, if anyone would like to start an encyclopedic article about Editorial oversight, I think Wikipedia would benefit from it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:30, 26 May 2010 (UTC)