Talk:Knight Ridder

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Companies Mid‑importance

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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Journalism Mid‑importance

	Journalism portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Important Fact?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1381528/Knight-Ridder-tablet-looks-just-like-iPad-17-YEARS-OLD.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.201.6.186 (talk) 10:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Role in the tv series

What role did the Knight Rider company play in the tv series? Was michael knight supposed to be working for them or what?

Trivia about Meaning of Ridder in Dutch

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stay_on_topic

This is not relevant to an article on the company Knight-Ridder. Wikipedia isn't just a collection of irrelevant and loosely relevant trivia and it's not a Dutch-English dictionary either. If the fact that ridder meant knight had played some role in the history of the company, then I might see your point, but it hasn't.

Ortcutt 21:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I do not see it as a prerequisite of relevance or notability that the name has to have played a role in the company's actual history; I believe that the very existence of such a rare coincidence (and its funny nature) is enough. However, Knight Ridder is not a high-enough priority for me to get into a big fight over the interpretation of the relevant Wikipedia policies. I already have my hands full with fixing the huge mess of overlapping and disorganized content in Lawyer, Juris Doctor, Law school, etc.. You win for now. --Coolcaesar 05:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also find it interesting enough - it's just a funny coincidence is all, and I don't think the article claims that it has any greater significance. Wikipedia is not just a collection of trivia, but that doesn't mean that trivia is completely banned. — sjorford (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of waking a sleeping dog, I agree, it is just a mildly interesting coincidence, not particularly rare even, and does not belong here. That's the whole point to having a style manual in the first place. If "I happened to chuckle at this" should be an exception, revise the style manual accordingly.

Tahrlis (talk) 20:44, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Ortcutt on both points. This is irrelevant. Further, the assertion of there being a "popular belief" is not substantiated and seems imagined by the writer at best if not an outright falsehood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poxenator (talk • contribs) 17:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1933

what exactly was founded in california in 1933? the article doesnt mention where they were at this time.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Knight Ridder. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20050428073639/http%3A//www.knightridder.com/about/location.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060526083950/http://www.medianewsgroup.com/companynews/2006/McClatch%20MNG%20Release.pdf to http://www.medianewsgroup.com/companynews/2006/McClatch%20MNG%20Release.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:50, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]