Talk:The West Australian

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Australia / Western Australia (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon The West Australian 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-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (marked as High-importance).
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
WikiProject Journalism (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

earlier comment[edit]

Adjusted to locally edited as the Australian is print by news limited and distrubuted daily in Perth as well Gnangarra 15:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

NPOV[edit]

This article has a number of statements using words like many, rarely, concerned, etc. Also comment like 'Doesnt respone to crtiques' though probable factual they all need to have a reference or be reword Gnangarra 01:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: how can you mount an attack on a paper's journalistic style with a one-sided rant such as this, packed with unsourced and unsubstantiated claims? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.5.59.1 (talkcontribs)

The West is a sham of a news provider and practically a mouthpiece for the Liberal party, proof of this exists through its coverage (especially in and around the 2005 election and the Kucera/Birney affairs) but for some reason the article resorts only to vague allegations. Coverage of Paul Armstrong's fines for various things for instance as well as quotes from Bob Hawke from 2005 would give sources to the issues raised. To a neutral reader the page seems hysterical - the business section, for example, is widely respected and its employment pages are institutional. Also the History section is quite incomplete - eg the attempt to become a local newspaper in the 1960s, the Western Mail buyout etc. Really the article needs an overhaul to bring it up to the standard of the pages for eastern states dailies. Orderinchaos78 18:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
All West Australian newspaper articles (ie Sunday Times, the lack of anything about the two western mails, the independent, the daily news and the west australian) are very low quality, maybe some effort should be put into them as they reflect badly on the wa/perth project - considering how much the current newspapers get away with unsourced news materials (anyone notice the west has dropped sourcing stories) and the fact that they have the cheek to lift stuff off wikipedia :) SatuSuro 14:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
You don't have to read The West, and shouldn't the discussion page be about the quality of the article and how it can be improved. Also, all of those citations could easily be sourced from the website.I like Radiohead 10:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
I think you'll find 75% of my comment was about the article - which I note is still in need of radical improvement - and almost none of the items I mentioned would be on the website (they don't even keep their own articles beyond a few weeks). Orderinchaos78 10:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
This article is shite. Yes the newspaper may have its bias, but you do not need to fall to its level. And rather than appear as appraisal of this newspaper, it sounds more like a sounding board for somebody with issues. Kransky 10:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think you'll find much disagreement with your view, to be honest. My personal preference would be to rip the article up and start again as a collaborative research effort with anyone who wants to contribute warmly invited, so that way we don't even have to work with what we've got to produce a quality article about one of Australia's oldest continuous newspapers. There are pro and anti views which need to be considered and accommodated, the current article manages to do neither. (I see SatuSuro and myself are thinking along similar lines - we've both been concerned by the quality of this article for around 9 months). Orderinchaos78 03:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree completely. The West as a paper isn't worth wiping my bum with, but that's not relevant to a site that's supposed to be a source of quasi-encyclopedic content. The article needs to be reworked, and the full history the paper researched. Furthermore this history should take precedence in terms of the article's focus - the very valid criticisms of the paper's bias and quality can go in a criticisms section, where they belong Xlh 09:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Maybe - it probably needs to be either completely re-written, or otherwise - a systemic editing to bring it to a reasonable standard - the newspaper is at a low standard in a total australian context - and deserves criticism - a much earlier form, of this article read like a PR piece. The west in its current form is a mere pimple on the backside of its historical context and relevance in west australian history SatuSuro 11:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Title of Article[edit]

Shouldnt the title be 'The West Australian (Newspaper)' for wiki naming conventions ?User:SatuSuro 01:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I think we only disambiguate ambiguous article titles. "The West Australian" is not ambiguous as far as I know, i.e. there's nothing else it can refer to other than the newspaper, so we don't need to disambiguate. The exception to the "only disambiguate ambiguous titles" rule is if some WikiProject has agreed in advance to predisambiguate every article of a particular kind, such as the agreement to predisambiguate all Australian towns by naming them in the form Town, State. I'm not aware that any such agreement has been made for newspapers. Snottygobble 01:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
The Problem is, for a non-western australian reader - there is nothing to identify it as a newspaper? User:SatuSuro 01:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Can you suggest a situation in which a non-WA reader will see a link to the article without any context telling them its a newspaper? Looking at the "what links here" for the article, I'm seeing a lot of references of the form:
"In 2006, The West Australian newspaper has run a series of articles highlighting the awful state of the Halls Creek indigenous population."
Snottygobble 01:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Good Point. Maybe there is no need at this stage, but I would hazard a guess that the Sunday Times qualifier of 'Western Australia' is a useful one, because of the commonality over time of newspapers with that name, and in many parts of the english speaking world. We just have to wait until something or somebody makes a claim in a novel title, or appelation of or pertaining to 'The West Australian' which is not a newspaper to make the disambiuation then, until then, we leave it to stand alone? User:SatuSuro 01:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Sounds right to me. There was a famous racehorse named "West Australian", but without the "The" in front. Snottygobble 01:48, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

twoz BOLD[edit]

the cut sections are now at Talk:The West Australian/cut section Gnangarra 11:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposal to improve/replace this article[edit]

It's accepted by both advocates and critics of the West Australian newspaper who have written above and on talk pages around the place that this article is a sorry mess, and has been for a long time (at least 9 months as far as I'm aware). Rather than leave it as such, what are people's ideas on how to fix it or replace it? One idea may be to form a point list in this talk page (perhaps initially based on one of the better pages on this topic elsewhere), leave it for a couple of weeks so a range of people can add to or comment on it, and then build paragraphs around the dot points. Also a reference list of books, articles and journals which can be used for sourcing information. Orderinchaos78 03:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

There no FA newspapers to take a lead from, there are two articles that have achieved GA status, The Wall Street Journal, The Western Star after reading both I'm suprised that the WSJ is GA. WSJ has a very short history section for a paper thats been in circulation since 1882 and the article focuses a significant portion on the present publication. Western Star focus on its history seperate ownership and publications is interesting. Combination of the two offers a good basis, my thoughts
  •  :History - sectioned to diff periods, focus on pub type/style, print locations Gnangarra 10:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Absorption of other newspapers in the early days gives a false sense of which the first real west was - as there were other take over - need careful delineation SatuSuro 12:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
is there any easy way to mark off the history? clearly the Perth Gazette was one phase. Orderinchaos78 11:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Best way is to go to henrietta and check what they determine as the earlier forms SatuSuro 12:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • viz: - [West Australian - history of the newspaper, printing techniques and building Summary Photographs first used in The West Australian on 10 May 1910 (W.A. 5/1/1933 p.21d)

Found in West Australian, 5 January 1933, Centenary issue, p.3,8e,21d (newspaper on microfilm), .b1674696x.Published Summary Photographs first used in The West Australian on 10 May 1910 (W.A. 5/1/1933 p.21d) Found in West Australian, 5 January 1933, Centenary issue, p.3,8e,21d (newspaper on microfilm),

    • Front page as reproduced in Savvas/Gaylard [1] - "The West Australian," which first appeared as "The Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal" on January 5, 1833, to-day commemorates its centenary." rest of supplement on microfilm (will check today) Orderinchaos78 17:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • associated publications
OK tricky one - The Daily News was separate then taken over - however WA News as a publisher has over 100 years been printer and publisher of a whole range of things - are we to mention non newspapers too? SatuSuro 12:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
In general yes but conditional to detail non newspaper publications - provided the publication is notiable in its own right Gnangarra
  • Weekend News
  • Daily News - should rate its own article, especially as a daughter art of WAN. Gnangarra

(at various stages attempts at weekly/monthly feature magazines - like Pic-Mag in the late 40s and early 50's -

  • Regional editions (east suburban section for example) for a while in the 60's. (Battye has pretty good info on these) - went into the early 70s.
  • acquistiion of the quokka


  • Notable Editors - Editorial philosopy
recent ones are Paul Murray (1990-2000) Brian Rogers (Aug 2000-resigned Jun 2003) and Paul Armstrong (appointed 8 Aug 2003, joined Feb 2003 as business editor (from Evening Standard) took up role 10 Sep 2003 - source [2]) - get a list going back (shouldn't be too hard) Orderinchaos78 11:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Neither arte really notable compared to the earlier ones - shows what limited understanding we have of the history. One could say that Armstrong is invisible and Murray is large in size.... SatuSuro 12:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
DYK Paul Murray (6PR radio presenter), hey this page needs a new title as he aint with 6pr any more Gnangarra 13:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Moved to Paul Murray (journalist). —Moondyne 12:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
List from 1983 anniv edition (entire supp republished in Gaylard [3] p.6 (will get WA cite today)) lists:
Charles Macfaull (5 Jan 1833- death 13 Dec 1846) obit 19 Dec 1846, Mr Arthur Shenton (Owner, editor 1 Jan 1848-death 16 Mar 1871), Mr Henry Hullock (1871?-1879) (renamed WA Times "by syndicate of prominent settlers" in 1874, then "WA" as present from 18 Nov 1879), Sir Thomas Cockburn-Campbell (managing director, part owner 1879-1887) appointed after Mr Charles Harper (died 1912) bought out syndicate, Sir John Winthrop Hackett Senior (1887-1913 editor and part owner, 1913-death 19 Feb 1916 sole owner), Mr George Wickham (very briefly in 1916), Sir Alfred Langler (1916-1927 editor, governing director), WA Newspapers Ltd formed 1926 (UWA received £425,000 and Anglican Church £138,000 - how come? answer: this was from Hackett's estate which was being managed by Wickham then Langler, the 138k paid for St George's College at UWA - source as per Hackett article) Mr H J Lambert (1929-1946, editor), Mr E C de Burgh (1946-1956), Mr W T G Richards (1956-1972), Mr Malcolm C (Bon) Uren (1972-1983). From 1927 owners were: C.P.Smith (came from Melbourne Argus) (1927-1951), Mr James Macartney (1951-retirement 1969) (first editor of radio magazine The Broadcaster (a WAN weekly first pub 1934), editor of Daily News (bought by WAN in 1935), company taken over by Herald & Weekly Times Ltd of Melbourne in 1969 - Sir Keith Macpherson of Melbourne (1970-1975). later - Editors Don Smith (1983-1987) Don Baker (1987-1990) - Bob Cronin (editor in chief 1987-1996), took a run for Stirling in 2001
  • current format
Desperately trying to be a tabloid - SatuSuro 12:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
smirking, Was thinking WSJ format :) plus distribution country/city editions Gnangarra 12:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Let's try to keep this talk page on the topic of how to improve the article, please, okay? Hesperian 23:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Point taken - but the history - for some of us - is more important than the present - as the current context is a mere shadow of its history - we now have enough history on this talk page to do a good history section, I would say - someone - go for it !SatuSuro 00:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
OK, I now have some full text stuff from very old papers, and a timeline - where should I chuck it? Orderinchaos78 13:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Ancestry of the West Australian[edit]

Information sourced from Battye, it is safe in every case but the first to cite p.2 of the first publication date as a source as well (back in those days the first page was public notices and the news started on the second page in a very hard to read column style)

  • Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal (5 January 1833 to 25 December 1847
    • Weekly on Saturdays
    • Initially was a four-page publication (source WA 17/11/1979 p.39)
  • Perth Gazette and Independent Journal of Politics and News (1 January 1848 to 30 September 1864)
    • Weekly on Saturdays until 21 April 1849
    • Weekly on Fridays thereafter
  • Western Australian Times (separate publication) (1 October 1863 to end of Sep 1864)
  • Perth Gazette and Western Australian Times (merged) (7 October 1864 to 26 June 1874)
  • Western Australian Times (3 July 1874 to 14 November 1879)
    • Both weekly on Fridays
  • The West Australian (18 November 1879 onwards)
    • 18 Nov 1879 - 16 Oct 1883 - Tue, Fri
    • 18 Oct 1883 - 23 Dec 1884 - Tue, Thu, Sat
    • 01 Jan 1885--> - Daily Mon-Sat —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Orderinchaos78 (talkcontribs) 13:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC).
I really think this info should be in a should be a separate article - ' Early Newspapers of Western Australia' SatuSuro 14:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This is West specific, there was a lot more then just the west Gnangarra 14:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough - if thats the case - its early days just like the rwahs journal! SatuSuro 14:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, a new article History of newspapers in Western Australia or similar please. I recall a good article on this in an old Early Days booklet which I'll try to dig up. —Moondyne 12:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

OK - I now know that from 1970 to 1985ish the paper was owned by Herald & Weekly Times, at which point it was acquired by Bell Group who already owned the Western Mail, in print since 8 Nov 80 (in its second incarnation) whose last edition went to print on 2 January 1988. The final edition (on p3) notes the Bell link. Anyone have anything a bit more solid on the Bell Resources link, and who did it go to after Bell failed? (I seem to remember them being caught up in the whole WA Inc churn) Orderinchaos78 15:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

current event tag[edit]

I added this tag as the current teacup storm is producing more information about alleged bias buit will have to wait for the sunday times for a WP:RS media reference as the west isnt likely to provide us with one. Gnangarra 14:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

ABC have been reporting on it on their online news. Orderinchaos 18:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
[4] Hesperian 06:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Political leaning[edit]

I feel there should be some mention made of the West's political leanings. For example, in The Australian, there is a section discussing the paper's outlook, dubbing it liberal conservatism. I think it is important to note the West's outlook in a similar way. It would be preposterous to pretend that the West does not have an ideological leaning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.33.230.148 (talk) 03:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

  • However that may be - its hardly the tag that just got put on it in the infobox either SatuSuro 10:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Refresh the west[edit]

Quoting from the website - is unnecessary detail for a 175 year old newspaper - I can think of all the drunk journos who inhabited the palace as being far more interesting than a failed attempt at takeover - therefore it was pruned - and the 175th magazine section started. Refresh the west is a mere dot of the history of which the current journos dont even appreciate probably SatuSuro 01:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Notable employees[edit]

I think it should be a section near the end of the article like Alumni for schools etc. What is the inclusion criteria? Gnangarra 04:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Beats me; I was just following suit while trying to finalise the Blackburn article. I'll move it and see how it looks. There's quite a few imbalances in the article's structure. One that puzzled me is the section on Controversy in 2007. There should be a list from here to billy-o of the battles the paper's had with W.A. governments. I guess that's just what came immediately to mind when those edits were being done. Retarius | Talk 04:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Gnang - Criteria - either gone on to other public positions - (murray to radio), to have gone on to a career that transcends the hack journos thankless life (robert drewe as novelist), to have in other words gained public acclaim (or otherwise) outside of their previous slog
Ret - wa gov vs the west or vice versa is a sep art

cheers guys SatuSuro 04:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Agree with sats the controversies are a separate article its been an ongoing issue with the west. But the criteria IMHO needs to be more refined as most journos to come out of the west have worked at the west and theres been more than a couple of sporting persons that have turned journo who have also worked for the west. Gnangarra 05:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

<edit conflict>

Actually, I hadn't checked the history when I wrote the above. I only have a peripheral interest in this article but I can now see that it's been stretched and squeezed like an accordion over the past three years and that my comment on controversies was rather misguided. I think the only way this article can progress is if all qualitative/political analysis material is removed. As I said on the W.A. Wikiproject talk page, I really don't believe that any attempt to characterise the political positions or editorial line of newspapers is useful here. I'd remove that section about populism, on that basis. I'd also, now, remove that "controversy" section. There's enough material in the history file to make a stub for a sub-article on the "Wars of the West" if anyone wanted to. Retarius | Talk 05:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the uncited comments from Keating certainly don't enhance the article and maybe should be removed (or cited), but removing the statement on the paper's political/editorial leanings would be equally inappropriate. This media outlet may be publicly owned, but at the end of the day as a media outlet, it's entirely appropriate for it's political leanings to be examined, critiqued and cited. There is little to no argument between commentators that the West is a paper which is editorially conservative. To remove that very pertinent (and important) information from the article would certainly be to the article's detriment. Indeed, removing that would only serve the agenda of attempting to present 'The West' as a wholly objective media outlet, which it clearly is not. Xlh (talk) 07:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.210.212 (talk) 12:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Fire[edit]

Early days, but there a sfire at the old Newspaperhouse on the terrace, [5] Gnangarra 07:16, 23 February 2010 (UTC)