Talk:Crikey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Crikey is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
An ad.
- Added some critisisms of Crikey. That should solve the problem of it looking like something promotional. I would like to see bits of it rewritten as it does still seem to have a slight POV problem. - Bambul☯ 06:24, 1 June 2005 (UTC)
- It had a slight POV problem before, but it now has a much worse and obvious bias - against Crikey this time. The ban from the lockup was more complicated than that; the defamation claims are made to sound the worst possible without any context, and there's no mention of the many times they have indeed been right, or the changes they've managed to force. On the other side of the equation, it also doesn't address the many complaints about Crikey's quality since the PMP takeover. Ambi 06:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Was the lockup ban really about Crikey's reporting? It didn't really affect the commentary - Crikey hardly needs up to the minute access. It was more of a slight against its media credentials. Have tried to add some more objective info.--Jack Upland 03:59, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
What is its political slant - the 3 main names mentioned on the page are Liberals (sort of)? -Matthew238 23:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- As a whole, it doesn't really have one. Mayne is a bit of an eccentric (former Liberal, then People Power, then unaligned), and Beecher is more of a media figure than a political one. It does take on a right-wing slant, however, as their main political correspondent, Christian Kerr, is an ex-Liberal staffer who is ideologically very similar to Andrew Bolt. Rebecca 02:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
I think Kerr is more intellectual and less extreme than Bolt, though he is clearly more right-wing than Mayne. I would say the writers are generally 'socially liberal' free marketeers, representing the often-discussed segment of former Liberal-supporters that has increasingly become alienated from the Howard Government due to its lack of accountability, dog-whistling racism, and 'social conservatism' (influence of the Religious Right etc). It is notable, however, that many of its readers, as evidenced by its Comments section, are left-wing. There are a number of contradictions in the general political line, such as:
- Animosity to unions, except the Media Union which represents them.
- Sympathy to environmentalism but antagonism to green groups.
- Willingness to take up leftwing causes (civil liberties, social reform) but antagonism to identifiable leftists.
- Championing of open debate but vilification and dismissal of unions, greens, and leftists.--Jack Upland 00:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. 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 assessment scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] Split the article?
Shouldn't this article be split into one on the word crikey and another on crikey.com.au? --130.226.173.20 09:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Should be on the term, not the site. And 'squatter' seems pov.
I agree! Why focus on just one company rather than the general word. Especially now given the death of Irwin.
- It makes sense to have two different articles (at least). But Irwin's death isn't a good reason - it will only generate transient interest.--Jack Upland 23:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I have now done this. In a pedantic way, which others should feel free to improve.--Jack Upland 11:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not a dab page
This page does not qualify as a disambiguation page per WP:DAB policy. The policy specifically states that there should NOT be disambiguation for dictionary definitions, and also that disambiguation pages should be for similarly TITLED pages, not just for related comments. I am redirecting this page to the only link with Crikey in the name. -- cmhTC 05:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Crikeyscreenshot.jpg
Image:Crikeyscreenshot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Crikeyscreenshot.jpg
Image:Crikeyscreenshot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
