Talk:Gawker.com

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of Blogging WikiProject, an attempt to build better coverage of Blogging on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the Project Page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on February 1, 2007. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

[edit] shameless promo piece

Pathetic attempt to gain credibility, is every person whose worked on the Deaspin/Gawker online rages getting an article? -Peakdetector —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peakdetector (talk • contribs) 19:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

I believe with the Tom Cruise Scientology Video that Gawker now does have the credibility to have this piece listed on Wikipedia. Cs302b (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] article split?

This article should be split into Gawker.com and Gawker Media articles. It's very confusing as it is, particularly because article pages for other sites in the gawker network (i.e. Gizmodo) redirect here. --DDG 15:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, there already is a separate Gawker Media article. It seems the Gizmodo redirect should go there, not the Gawker.com article. Ytny 19:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Ahh ok. Then also the things like the profit for all of Gawker Media should be moved there. --DDG 19:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it appears that the New York Magazine article strictly deals with Gawker.com, not GM as a whole.

What really got Hauslaib’s attention, though, was Gawker’s advertising-rate sheet. According to Denton, the site received about 200,000 “page views” a day from readers. The site ran roughly two big ads on each page, and Gawker said that it charged advertisers $6 to $10 for every 1,000 page views—almost the same as a midsize newspaper.

Though I do think the revenue stuff is just as appropriate in GM article, as it speaks more about the GM's business model rather than Gawker.com's editorial content. Maybe the GM article needs a section on the business model? Ytny 20:25, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] similar blogs

The entry lists that Gawker spawned three other similar blogs, but Gawker Media now consists of well more than 4 total blogs. Are the three listed in this article (Defamer, Wonkette and Valleywag) distinguished because they are more or less regionally focused versus other blogs (idolator, jalopnik, for instance) which are not tied to a particular location? Cuffeparade 05:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)