Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Online newspaper
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have a section on Newspapers, so why not online ones. You also have a section about online radio! This is a very important subject. This has been writen by quite a few people. Online newspapers are very important. They show peoples true coulture and are taking more and more away from traditional print news. The diffrence between a newspaper online and a blog is very important and most do not see that blogs are not regualated. The online newspaper is a topic worth keeping here! This is a silly and pointles edit to take this page away! Set up by some one who does not study the media or the implication of the main streem media on the internet. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Martin-jj (talk • contribs) 13:21, March 3, 2007.
Who posted this silly thing saying the online papers not being important? I am doing research about a UK based newspapers for a TV program later this year on the BBC. Very silly this. I found this site through google... well I know about it, but I have not used it until now. I was looking for a website I have been asked to do the background on and spotted that this site has information on. So logged on and the first thing I see is that things are to be deleted with out research being done. I will be adding this fact to our program notes. If wikipedia wants to be taken at face value, it should not allow the public to pick what is kept and not kept. The public should submit information and then staff on the site should check it out! I have spotted huge holes and lots of information being cut, due to it not fitting the editing system. This post should be kept as it is! I am not going back on here as it has lost credibility to me. I know what the facts are and this post is spot on. Lots of information, ok needs a bit of a clean up, but DO NOT delete, just because of that!--Fm-jessamine 19:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Note that the above comments appear to be from two different accounts owned by the same user—an example of sockpuppetry.--Srleffler 01:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
