Talk:The Village Voice/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 [www.cafepress.com/thevillagevoice/782982 Click right think left] 2 Film reviews 3 What on earth can this mean? 4 what day of the week is it published? 5 Gender 6 Silke Tudor pic? 7 Wiki link 8 Tom Robbins 9 Fair use rationale for Image:Voicelogo-181.gif 10 Fair use rationale for Image:Printcover.jpg

[www.cafepress.com/thevillagevoice/782982 Click right think left]

Do they mean click right as in using a mouse? If so, what are they trying to say? --Wasabe3543 05:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Film reviews

Does the village voice give the toughest film reviews or what? It seems like a film rarely gets a positive review unless it's truly superb. --Sirkeg 20:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

What on earth can this mean?

"The voice is also recognized for its 18+ content usually in the back of the magazine and is the only newspaper to do so." There is so much wrong with this sentence I hardly know where to begin:

1. "The voice…": presumably "The Voice…"
2. "…is also recognized…": by whom?
3. "…for its 18+ content…": I presume this is a euphemism for sex ads? Why euphemize?
4. "…usually in the back of…": so it is sometimes elsewhere? News to me.
5. "…the magazine…": it's not a magazine, it's a tabloid.
6. "…and is the only newspaper to do so": grammatically, "to do so" has no referent. However, the real nub of the matter: this sentence seems to be saying that the Voice is the only newspaper to do something (to have sex ads? to be "recognized" for them—by some unknown subject? something else I'm failing to consider?). If the claim is the first, then that's ridiculous: these are an economic mainstay of alternative weeklies around the U.S., and right in NYC Screw consists of little else. If the claim is the second, then whom is it uniquely recognized by? And, if it's the third, then what's the claim?

-- Jmabel | Talk 05:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Jmabel's comments, so I fixed this sentence, and moved it to be a separate paragraph. Perhaps others can tweak it to make it more accurate. SaxTeacher [[User_talk:SaxTeacher|<font size="1">(talk)</font>]] 13:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The Village Voice also promotes sexual promiscuity (ie. ads for whores), pornography, regularly interviewing and profiling pornstars, talking about porn films, etc. so it's not just sex ads, it's general sexual content. The pictures too are explicit. It's just another example of the moral decay and lack of standards of modern society. I am surprised there hasn't been criticisms or protests about this particularly since it's probably easily accessible to children. With such content, it's really a paper for those 18 and over and should be treated as any smut rag.

what day of the week is it published?

not on their website in their about page either —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.196.0.50 (talk • contribs) 23 May 2006.

It officially comes out Wednesday but you can get it Tuesday evening. People used to line up for it every Tuesday evening at Astor Place in NYC for the real estate listings. I don't know if they do anymore.03:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Gender

Fascinating: in the list of columnists, nearly all the men have individual Wikipedia articles, nearly none of the women do, and none of the women have a non-stub article. - Jmabel | Talk 06:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

You're right - I was amazed, for example, that Teresa Carpenter has no article. I'll try to get an article up in the next week. A good project would be to begin doing articles for some of the others.PaulLev 15:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, no time like the present - I just put up a stub for Teresa Carpenter.PaulLev 16:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Silke Tudor pic?

Right now there's a painting of current Voice columnist Silke Tudor as one of the illustrations. Tudor has written only recently for the Voice and isn't that well known -- couldn't a photo of a better-known Voice writer be found and used instead? (----) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.188.3.113 (talk • contribs) 7 March 2007.

Replaced now by Nat Hentoff, a much better choice. - Jmabel | Talk 22:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Wiki link

I think the article on Wikipedia is irrelevant to the object of this article. While in theory it could be used on Wikipedia, it is of no use here. I suggest it is removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.154.144.103 (talk • contribs)

• What is it that you think should be removed? Some portion of the article or the entire article? Alansohn 07:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Tom Robbins

I think the link from Tom Robbins' name in the article points to the wrong Tom Robbins. Is the novelist who lives in the Pacific Northwest really the reporter who covers NY local issues/politics? If no one objects, I am going to remove the link shortly. Sundinkc 14:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Sundinkc

Fair use rationale for Image:Voicelogo-181.gif

Image:Voicelogo-181.gif 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Printcover.jpg

Image:Printcover.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)