This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Very nice to see a paper, and particularly a British regional, make it to FA...but why so little Talk? Is there an unflagged archive somewhere? (I'd be interested to see the issues that came up on the road to FA, as there are a number of regional newspaper articles I want to work on.) Barnabypage (talk) 17:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
As a recovering journalist, I have to ask: Why did we single this particular newspaper out for a 3,200-word article? Sca (talk) 20:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me but Wikipedia is a place for collabrative learning where we work together to write quality articles on everything of note reguardless of what the topic is, there is no "singling out" going on here, there is a different featured article displayed every day whilst added to this one user worked hard on this article to get it to a top status, as a featured article it is displayed once on the main page as a fine example of one of the best articles here on wikipedia. It has some significance, history, there are other articles on local newspapers on wikipedia, but not all of them are of the best standard so they don't get on the main page, simple as, no bias. WP:FA and WP:COI might be policies that relate to your question. Mackemfixer (talk) 21:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Anyone can write an article about anything deemed 'notable' on Wikipedia - from great explorers to presidents, kings and ... newspapers. As a point of note, it is the 135th anniversary of this newspaper today, which also makes it a notable date. If you feel that another newspaper, or indeed any notable topic, deserves a show on the front page, then it is up to you to put the work in. It will take many weeks, indeed months, to bring it up to FA status, but then you will at least have a chance of getting something you want on the front page for a day.-- Myosotis Scorpioides 21:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
It's not that I want something else on the front page for a day. It just didn't strike me as particularly notable. There are hundreds if not thousands of good small to medium-sized newspapers around the world, and it seems the Sunderland Echo may be one of them. I just don't see it as being particularly noteworthy or of interest to a significant proportion of the audience. The latter criterion, by the way, is one standard for judging newsworthiness. Sca (talk) 22:15, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
That may be true, but Wikipedia is a volunteer project, so editors can work on any article they wish—regardless of whether there are more notable topics. Cheers, –JuliancoltonHappyHolidays 22:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Articles are chosen for the home page on the basis of their encyclopedic quality, not the relative notability of the topic. It's a curious aspect of Wikipedia that often articles on relatively obscure subjects are better than those on major, mainstream topics. Barnabypage (talk) 11:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
The article has a nice selection of images but the summary on each image page has no description of the photo. For example File:Echo001.jpg has an article caption about hot metal production, but where was the photo made, when was it taken, what is going on.
Also, the images have a copyright release but the source is missing. What web site, library, book or archive provided the photos? -- SWTPC6800 (talk) 22:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)