Jump to content

Talk:Mail Tribune

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

Copy editing section

[edit]

The copy editing section refers to the copy desk being outsourced to Austin as part of the GateHouse Media ownership structure - the MT is now owned by Rosebud so that is no longer true. If anyone has this information they should add it (or delete/revise this section for accuracy).

This is true. Rosebud brought copy desk functions and page layout and production back in house when it acquired the paper from Gatehouse. Bigsprings (talk) 15:27, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

[edit]

Please, by all means, somebody merge this ... I stubbed this page a month ago, never suspecting that all the content it needed was simply on the wrong page, Southern Oregon news media. Wiki Wistah 21:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for doing the merge. Now for cleanup. This looks like it was someone's school paper--it has way too much detail for an encyclopedia article. If no one objects, I'm going to pare it down considerably in the next few days. For example, do we really need to know what software the newsroom uses? Most newsrooms use AP style, is this particularly notable? This is more an essay on "what a newspaper is" than an article about the Mail Tribune. It would be nice to see some history of the paper added, along the lines of The Oregonian article. Katr67 00:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there's still a lot of "what is a newspaper" material here. As you can see (compare with history logs for the old article), I did pare this version down a bit from the original. Go ahead and be bold about editing further, though. As for adding in history -- I'm not really in a position to do that, not being from Oregon. Hopefully someone with deeper access to local libraries or newspaper archives can help. W i k i W i s t a h t / c 05:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing the work on paring it down some. I did see it was shorter but I didn't compare the two versions. There's probably a bit of history on the paper's website, I'll see what I can find and hopefully one of the original authors or an interested person from Medford can find out more. Katr67 16:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm deleting the reference to George P. Putnam--someone got the wrong George. See obit for the correct George Putnam here: http://id.mind.net/%7Etruwe/tina/putnam.htmlBentruwe (talk) 00:20, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]