Talk:List of newspapers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Journalism
Journalism Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Journalism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to journalism. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a message to explain the ratings and to identify possible improvements to the article.

Does this list of newspapers only count daily newspapers, and not Sunday editions? Because Western Australia's daily and Sunday newspapers are independent of one another. It's not just a Sunday edition of the same newspaper. - Mark 01:28, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] How many issues per week.

It would be interesting to add which are issued 7 days/wk, and, if 6/wk, on which day not.--Patrick 08:25, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I agree. We should just start adding it, but have to use some kind of a template for it... How do you suggest we do it? --Vikingstad 10:39, Mar 21, 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps in some countries 6 is the rule, in other 7, then for each country the rule can be mentioned at the top of that section, with any exception at the line of the paper, like in List of Dutch newspapers.--Patrick 10:57, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] How many newspapers per country.

I found this page after adding some missing mastheads from List of newspapers in Australia (which is still not complete - missing more weekly mastheads), but I'd imagine this page would get (more) unwieldly if they were added here. ChrisM 05:45, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. Papers

Since the US papers seation on this page only lists the top 20 by circulation, and since they're already ranked, wouldn't it make more sense to put them in ranked order? Seems more useful than alphabetical in this instance. If no one objects soon I'm going to go ahead and do it. -R. fiend 15:47, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

  • Went ahead and did it. -R. fiend 05:58, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Question: why is the section on the US completely different from everything else? All the other entries follow the format Country; (see complete list at 'list of newspapers from this country'); list of a few notable papers in bullet format. The US entry has explanatory paragraphs, TWO lists of 20 papers, numbered in two different systems (both of which I am sure are available at the page linked to) and generally takes up far more space.
I am going to alter this to make it more streamlined and fit the rest of the entries, however I will leave it be if someone reverts.

[edit] Url links

I'm intending to include the URL (external) link for newspapers in this article, and to indicate whether the organisations in question operate a pay-per-view or pay subscription policy for access to their news archives. I'm not sure this article is the right place to do it, though. I'd rather have a list of media sources, which would include organisations other than newspapers that also provide news archives, e.g. BBC. Any thoughts on this are welcome. For further discussion of my machinations, see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Links_to_sources_that_charge_for_information

Including URL's is a good idea but it must let the user know before hand what to expect (pay per view/click site). In order to be fair to third world countries/ non fully commercialised newspapers, as the majority of their sites are not being exploited to the extent western country newspapers are. The public's right to know is paramount and newspapers do this well.

On the other hand giving URL links to "media sources" opens up a can of worms - literally. There's far too many frauds out there, sites that are listing newspapers, newspaper directories and utilising the traffic to generate profit from Google ads.

If you are going to list newspapers they must be separated from "media sources". The reality is that a lot of them are not familiar with or knowledgeable on legal regulations: plagiarism, crediting sources, copyrights and trademark laws.

There needs to be a clear distinction between the two.

Good Luck

Australian Newspaper Editor.

[edit] Note "official" newspapers?

A thought. As I wander through the listings, I'm thinking that it might be helpful to mark off "official" newspapers (People's Daily in the PRC, L'Osservatore Romano for the Vatican, Granma in Cuba, etc.) somehow. For one thing, it seems misleading to present these as "normal" newspapers. They're not, not normally. One does not read People's Daily for the content, for example. The content is almost irrelevant, as the article on the paper almost notes; You read it for the frequency and placement of stuff, not the details of the articles, and occasionally read between the lines to get a deeper hint as to Party thought. Similar with Granma, I'd bet, as it was with Pravda. And, in a small way, I'd suspect it's similar with L'Osservatore Romano, though probably not to the same extent. For another, it's helpful to try and lay out a country's media landscape, especially when one can assume that people from abroad are unlikely to be familiar with it. --Penta 23:03, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Maybe put those thoughts in the articles of respective newspapers. Labelling here would lead nowhere, as there would be too many opinions (revert war) of newspapers "official", "normal" and otherwise? feydey 01:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Redundancy?

This is a great directory of newspapers, but it provides too much detail. As it stands, it links to lists of newspapers in specific countries (like List of newspapers in Canada) but then also goes on to list many of the newspapers included in those sub-articles. The result? If you want to add a newspaper, you have to add it to two separate lists: this one, and the one for the specific country.

My suggestion is to make this page contain only links to directories for specific countries (and not include links to articles on specific newspapers). Thoughts? User:Huwmanbeing 04:06, 12 February 2006 (EST)

There've been no comments either for or against this issue over the past month, so I assume no one feels strongly about it. Since this page is definitely larger than the recommended Wikipedia article length, and since I notice users have had to make their additions both on this page AND on the individual country pages, I'll plan to reduce this article down to a directory of country lists as described above. If anyone has any suggestions/comments/alternatives, please just let me know. Thanks! Huw 01:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
The above comments were made over a year ago, but I thought I'd chime in here anyway. I can't make any sense out of this page at all. I just don't see the need for a exhaustive list of newspapers (which would be ungainly if complete), and there seems to be neither rhyme nor reason to the addition of those papers that are listed here. This page is fairly old (dating from December 2001), so I can see how it served a purpose when Wikipedia was young, and then just grew organically over the five years since to become the mess it is today. I think the best thing would be to merge most of this into the paltry List of national newspapers (only Canada, the U.K., and the U.S. are currently listed there!), with the strict guideline that only nationwide papers are listed there. Perhaps there's another way to pare down this page with more specific guidelines for inclusion, but as it is it just seems superfluous to the categories and lists that already exist. -Tobogganoggin talk 23:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd forgotten about this page until recently, but I just came across it again. It's been a year and a half since I proposed to reduce this page to a directory of country lists, and not a single opposing view's been posted, so I'm going ahead. No one can say they haven't had adequate time to voice their opinions! :-) Huwmanbeing ★ 02:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kyrgyzstan

WWW.parohod.kg www.analitik.kg www.msn.kg www.kabar.kg www.gazeta.kg

[edit] just Taiwan is enough

I think the article is simply a list of newspapers around the world, and there is really no need to put "Republic of China" behind Taiwan since most of the world recognize Taiwan as "Taiwan" already. It will actually eliminate the confusion of two "Chinas". Secondly, the world adopts the One China Policy of PRC as the only legitimate China of the world, it would be politically incorrect to put ROC up there since the UN Resolution 2758 has already replaced ROC's legal representation with PRC. And finally, neither ROC's constitution nor international laws state that the ROC possesses the sovereignty of Taiwan. It is much better we just leave "Taiwan" the way it is, that way, you do not upset the Chinese for creating another China and the Taiwanese for imposing a foreign trustee government as the owner of their territorial sovereignty. Since the article did not put "Republic of Korea" for S. Korea and "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" for N. Korea... why ROC for Taiwan? It's unecessary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mafia godfather (talk • contribs) 23:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] ISSNs

  • Not a single ISSN is listed on this page. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to untag this page and tag the individual pages on publications that could have an ISSN listed but do not? --Keesiewonder talk 22:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Concur. Tag removed. Dl2000 00:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC)