Talk:Tulsa World

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Untitled

I would like to suggest that the second paragraph of this article is biased and inflammatory. Partisan criticism can be attached to any newspaper, and often is, but I feel that the Tulsa World is sufficiently mainstream (this article even states as much) that it can by no means be viewed as "notorious" in this way. Stephendedalus82 02:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article clearly shows bias in the second paragraph. I would be one to strike it altogether. As well, I dispute the "liberal" label on the World. It may be seen as liberal compared to the Daily Oklahoman, I think even the Washington Times would be considered liberal compared to the Oklahoman. As well, the World endorsed GW Bush in the last two elections. --D Wilbanks 06:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I pulled the NPOV tag and cleaned up the article. A few of the statements need to be sourced, but I hope it captures the two points that a) the World is an "advocating" paper that rubs people the wrong way (especially conservatives), but b) to call them a liberal paper is ridiculous because they don't meet any of the standards of a liberal paper (e.g. endorsing Kerry/Gore). --D Wilbanks 18:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone from the World (209.184.242.241 traces back to tulsaworld.com) deleted the old version of the article and replaced it with what appears to be a boilerplate history of the paper (unwikified). I took the liberty of merging the history into the previous version of the article. I am unclear as to whether this history is under copyright and there able to be published under the Creative Commons. I would appreciate some help in determining the copyright status of that section, as well as some cites of historical facts included. --D Wilbanks 08:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref for political leaning. Needs criticism section

The politcal section was a mess with unsourced material. I have integrated unrelated material into the history section and removed some of the things that were obviously opinion (and seemingly written by a world staffer). Hopefully we can get some refs soon for the paper's political affiliation, which I'm sure is to the left. Also, it needs a criticism section, as there has been plenty of criticism of the paper's bias with different local issues. If anyone finds a ref for these things, just drop it off and I'd be happy to integrate it into the article. Okiefromokla•talk 20:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tulsa Tribune

Why is there no entry for the Tulsa Tribune? A worthwhile competitor of the Tulsa World till the 90's, when it shut down after its long-time owner passed away. Why isn't there even a small writeup?

The foregoing was posted by IP editor 74.195.249.175 on 14 October 2008. It took a long time, but I have posted a Tulsa Tribune article today.--Arxiloxos (talk) 04:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 02:05, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 18:29, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tulsa World. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tulsa_World&oldid=1194843983"