This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers 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.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The criteria include: "It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. ... Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues."
I don't believe one could reasonably say that there are cleanup issues or policy violations, as it's thoroughly footnoted with even Congressional-hearing testimony. As for content gaps, this article about a newspaper that lasted 3 1/2 years contains a plethora of dates, background information on its start-up and financing, and notes on its contributors, and it even names where the newspaper's files and records were stored after the paper's dissolution. I've presented an argument for B class, and we should hear the arguments for C class. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
