Talk:MediaNews Group

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Companies  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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 has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Journalism  
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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United States / Colorado (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado (marked as Low-importance).
 

Untitled[edit]

Section under corporate culture says "some say the newspapers lose their quality"--worst sort of rumor mongering. Who says? Please indicate sources. Deirdre 04:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Help![edit]

Something weird happened and I lost the other sections....I don't know what I did! Deirdre 20:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

List of publications[edit]

Did a big rearrange today, sorting the publications by state and city name, and running them in two columns. The "other properties" section is still not done -- someone needs to look it over and make sure all TV/radio properties are included (they're currently not, but I know there are broadcast geeks on this wiki who could do the job better than me). In the future, it would be best to copy other large media company articles (cf. Journal Register Company, Community Newspaper Holdings) and put only a list of top-circulation papers on the main page, and list everything in a separate "List of properties owned by MediaNews Group". I don't have circ figures for MNG handy, though. W i k i W i s t a h t / c 22:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Deal with Hearst Corp.[edit]

Could some expert help sort out his confusing change of ownership? [1] SaltyBoatr 17:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

History[edit]

The history section should be a bit more accurate. It is said that among these who gave the loan to MediaNews was the Gates Foundation. Two question: How much did it give? Who were the others? (I read it was General Electric Capital Corporation, the BMG Foundation and some banks, but i recite from my brain, do not know how much they gave in % and whether this information is correct. I just think it should be more accurate than only mentioning Gates Foundation WITHOUT saying how much in % or in total amount they contributed). 80.108.103.172 (talk)

Chambersburg Public Opinion[edit]

I want to put the Chambersburg Public Opinion [2] in the list, but the partnership with Gannett makes it a bit different. At 17,000 daily circulation maybe it should be left out anyway. Smallbones (talk) 18:12, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Prairie Mountain Publishing subsidiary[edit]

Wondering about adding info about this Boulder-based subsidiary, which purchased Lehman Communications, owner of several local Colorado papers, in Jan/Feb 2011.

Doug Grinbergs (talk) 04:47, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.examiner.com/a-470754~Weekly__nonprofit_sue_to_open_records.html
    Triggered by (?<=[/@.])examiner\.com(?:[:/?\x{23}]|$) on the local blacklist
  • http://www.examiner.com/a-556253~MediaNews__Hearst_trial_set_to_proceed.html
    Triggered by (?<=[/@.])examiner\.com(?:[:/?\x{23}]|$) on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 17:27, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I replaced the links and removed your template, Cyberbot; take another look if you like. The newly linked copies list no author, so archive links will be needed if the by-line is to stand. Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:51, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

"was" or "is"[edit]

The first line says this organization "was", but there's no indication of its disposition. It should either say "is" or tell us what happened to it. It appears to be still in existence but owned and/or managed by another organization. Lou Sander (talk) 16:16, 24 January 2015 (UTC)