Talk:The Yorkman - Revision history

Rozen at 12:08, 27 June 2007

2007-06-27T12:08:02Z

Darkferret: /* Suggestions */

2007-06-27T04:03:58Z

Suggestions

Rozen: /* Suggestions */

2007-04-01T16:25:40Z

Suggestions

The Yorkman: /* Suggestions */

2006-09-11T17:32:50Z

Suggestions

Elembis: /* Suggestions */ Credit authors, then?

2006-09-10T21:12:14Z

Suggestions: Credit authors, then?

The Yorkman: /* Suggestions */

2006-09-10T20:28:35Z

Suggestions

Elembis: Suggestions

2006-09-05T06:08:40Z

Suggestions

Elembis: /* Ad policy */ Three per issue is enough.

2006-09-02T16:02:39Z

Ad policy: Three per issue is enough.

The Yorkman at 11:46, 2 September 2006

2006-09-02T11:46:11Z

Elembis: Ad policy

2006-09-01T21:06:41Z

Ad policy

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 27 June 2007
Line 36:		Line 36:

	The DEP will steal your market share if you don't keep up. The last thing we need on this island is a media monopoly. --[[User:Darkferret\|Darkferret]] 04:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)		The DEP will steal your market share if you don't keep up. The last thing we need on this island is a media monopoly. --[[User:Darkferret\|Darkferret]] 04:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	I think we've already monopolised, unless that native newspaper that's being discussed comes through, i rather like being one of the only reporter/policemen on the island. [[User:RobZombie\|RobZombie]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:03, 27 June 2007
Line 34:		Line 34:

	I suggest you get issue 19 on soon, or your readers will riot! Its been a week, right? [[User:RobZombie\|RobZombie]]		I suggest you get issue 19 on soon, or your readers will riot! Its been a week, right? [[User:RobZombie\|RobZombie]]
		+
		+	The DEP will steal your market share if you don't keep up. The last thing we need on this island is a media monopoly. --[[User:Darkferret\|Darkferret]] 04:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:25, 1 April 2007
Line 32:		Line 32:

	:::The trouble with crediting the authors is that this leaves us open to retribution, should we criticise someone. remaining anonymous allows us to safely tackle dangerous subjects, as with the article on the Order in the next issue. The Order are very poqerful in York, where most of us come from, and we don't really want to be on their bad books. --[[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 17:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)		:::The trouble with crediting the authors is that this leaves us open to retribution, should we criticise someone. remaining anonymous allows us to safely tackle dangerous subjects, as with the article on the Order in the next issue. The Order are very poqerful in York, where most of us come from, and we don't really want to be on their bad books. --[[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 17:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	I suggest you get issue 19 on soon, or your readers will riot! Its been a week, right? [[User:RobZombie\|RobZombie]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:32, 11 September 2006
Line 30:		Line 30:

	::Okay, a tabloid it is. =) Perhaps articles should be credited to their authors, then? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)		::Okay, a tabloid it is. =) Perhaps articles should be credited to their authors, then? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::The trouble with crediting the authors is that this leaves us open to retribution, should we criticise someone. remaining anonymous allows us to safely tackle dangerous subjects, as with the article on the Order in the next issue. The Order are very poqerful in York, where most of us come from, and we don't really want to be on their bad books. --[[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 17:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 10 September 2006
Line 28:		Line 28:

	:We're going to try to take a couple of these suggestions onboard for issue 3, particularly the wider news coverage and the general appeal for opinions. As for giving sources for all our claims... this is a tabloid, you know... --[[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 20:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)		:We're going to try to take a couple of these suggestions onboard for issue 3, particularly the wider news coverage and the general appeal for opinions. As for giving sources for all our claims... this is a tabloid, you know... --[[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 20:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	::Okay, a tabloid it is. =) Perhaps articles should be credited to their authors, then? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 10 September 2006
Line 26:		Line 26:
	# '''Source citations'''. In my perfect world, every piece of information or statement that isn't common knowledge would be attributed to someone. (E.g., ''who'' is concerned by pro-pirate sentiment? ''Who'' thinks the [[Civilized Highway Society]] has shown "unswerving dedication"? It shouldn't be that hard to get a few people to speak up.) True, we can't verify sources, but I'd rather have sources I can't verify than no sources at all. And the source could speak up if the quote happened to be in error. I understand that it would be a big task to get every claim validated by a player in print (generally with an in-game comment), but I'm willing to help, and I'm sure others are as well. All it'd take is a pre-issue post with questions people are invited to answer and ask to others (so their responses can be reported), like this: "What do you think of recent activity by the [[Civilized Highway Society]] to expand the road network?" And articles would be more concise if each claim required a source.		# '''Source citations'''. In my perfect world, every piece of information or statement that isn't common knowledge would be attributed to someone. (E.g., ''who'' is concerned by pro-pirate sentiment? ''Who'' thinks the [[Civilized Highway Society]] has shown "unswerving dedication"? It shouldn't be that hard to get a few people to speak up.) True, we can't verify sources, but I'd rather have sources I can't verify than no sources at all. And the source could speak up if the quote happened to be in error. I understand that it would be a big task to get every claim validated by a player in print (generally with an in-game comment), but I'm willing to help, and I'm sure others are as well. All it'd take is a pre-issue post with questions people are invited to answer and ask to others (so their responses can be reported), like this: "What do you think of recent activity by the [[Civilized Highway Society]] to expand the road network?" And articles would be more concise if each claim required a source.
	I hope this criticism will be helpful and will be taken with the understanding that I think the paper is great already. — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 06:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)		I hope this criticism will be helpful and will be taken with the understanding that I think the paper is great already. — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 06:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	:We're going to try to take a couple of these suggestions onboard for issue 3, particularly the wider news coverage and the general appeal for opinions. As for giving sources for all our claims... this is a tabloid, you know... --[[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 20:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:08, 5 September 2006
Line 19:		Line 19:

	::Alright. I think three ads per issue is enough, so please line [[:Image:Open Arms banner.jpg]] up for the next issue. — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 16:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)		::Alright. I think three ads per issue is enough, so please line [[:Image:Open Arms banner.jpg]] up for the next issue. — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 16:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Suggestions ==
		+
		+	I like the paper so far, but [[The Yorkman/Issue 002\|issue 2]] made me consider a couple of things I'd like to see the paper shoot for in the future. I'd be willing to help with both of these.
		+	# '''Objectivity'''. I understand that the title is "The Yorkman", but the paper is read by people all over the island. With that in mind, I think the writers should try to maintain an objective tone instead of saying that the road network "represents a great triumph over adversity", that a "pro-pirate stance is a concern for many" (without giving names), that MickR's leadership was "inspiring", etc. I don't necessarily disagree with these statements, but I would rather read articles that are not obviously York- or outsider-centric.
		+	# '''Source citations'''. In my perfect world, every piece of information or statement that isn't common knowledge would be attributed to someone. (E.g., ''who'' is concerned by pro-pirate sentiment? ''Who'' thinks the [[Civilized Highway Society]] has shown "unswerving dedication"? It shouldn't be that hard to get a few people to speak up.) True, we can't verify sources, but I'd rather have sources I can't verify than no sources at all. And the source could speak up if the quote happened to be in error. I understand that it would be a big task to get every claim validated by a player in print (generally with an in-game comment), but I'm willing to help, and I'm sure others are as well. All it'd take is a pre-issue post with questions people are invited to answer and ask to others (so their responses can be reported), like this: "What do you think of recent activity by the [[Civilized Highway Society]] to expand the road network?" And articles would be more concise if each claim required a source.
		+	I hope this criticism will be helpful and will be taken with the understanding that I think the paper is great already. — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 06:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:02, 2 September 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:
	Are there any criteria that an ad must meet to be accepted? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)		Are there any criteria that an ad must meet to be accepted? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

−	Not really. We've never turned down and ad yet, and the more we have the more flavour we can give to the paper and the more we can serve the community. All the ads for this issue have been done as 500x100 pixels, and that's probably going to continue for the forseeable future. Either create the ad and [[Special:Emailuser/The_Yorkman\|e-mail]] it to us, or for those without photoshop skills, we can generally botch something together from a slogan and a vague idea. -- [[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 11:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)	+	:Not really. We've never turned down and ad yet, and the more we have the more flavour we can give to the paper and the more we can serve the community. All the ads for this issue have been done as 500x100 pixels, and that's probably going to continue for the forseeable future. Either create the ad and [[Special:Emailuser/The_Yorkman\|e-mail]] it to us, or for those without photoshop skills, we can generally botch something together from a slogan and a vague idea. -- [[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 11:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	::Alright. I think three ads per issue is enough, so please line [[:Image:Open Arms banner.jpg]] up for the next issue. — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 16:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:46, 2 September 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
−
	== Email addresses ==		== Email addresses ==

Line 16:		Line 15:

	Are there any criteria that an ad must meet to be accepted? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)		Are there any criteria that an ad must meet to be accepted? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	Not really. We've never turned down and ad yet, and the more we have the more flavour we can give to the paper and the more we can serve the community. All the ads for this issue have been done as 500x100 pixels, and that's probably going to continue for the forseeable future. Either create the ad and [[Special:Emailuser/The_Yorkman\|e-mail]] it to us, or for those without photoshop skills, we can generally botch something together from a slogan and a vague idea. -- [[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 11:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:06, 1 September 2006
Line 12:		Line 12:

	468x60 is a bit fiddly for my tastes, but I'm liking 500x100, and it would be nice to have them stack neatly. -- [[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 19:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)		468x60 is a bit fiddly for my tastes, but I'm liking 500x100, and it would be nice to have them stack neatly. -- [[User:The Yorkman\|The Yorkman]] 19:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Ad policy ==
		+
		+	Are there any criteria that an ad must meet to be accepted? — [[User:Elembis\|Elembis]] ([[User talk:Elembis\|talk]]) 21:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)