Talk:Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr.: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:12, 26 August 2009

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

New York (state) Start‑class

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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 (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state)
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:JournProjectArticles

Looks like an Obama campaign worker heavily edited this page. And why is it obvious, as the article says, that Sulzberger Jr. is anti-Obama?

Its fairly obvious that this article was written by a partisan of the right whose intention is to smear the NY Times. Not a particularly balanced article.

The Trust

Kudos to the person who tried to smear Sulzberger by using an out-of-context, incorrectly-quoted scene regarding Vietnam from "The Trust." The two men were drunk after a night on the Boston Common (not arrested after an antiwar protest, as cited) and Sulzberger Jr. said something negative about Vietnam in order to deliberately provoke his father, who was a strong supporter of the war (page 499, "The Trust: The Private and Powerful Family Behind the New York Times," by Susan Tifft and Alex Jones). You may not like The Times (there is some justification in your viewpoint), but please, let's stick to the facts, shall we?The Invisible Man 05:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's Not What You Know...

How many Times ataffers got -- or at least kept their jobs -- thanks to some association with the Sulzbergers, and Arthur Jr. in particular? There was a grossly incompetent picture editor (initials YAA) who was moved from one desk to another but was kept on due to her having Arthur Jr. as a "rabbi" (newspaper term for a mentor). She only recently retired at age 69, but had been drawing down a salary of $75-80K a year. A clerical supervisor (essentially a thug of the masthead) with the initials ES got her job at the Times after having met Arthur Jr. and his wife on a cruise in the mid-90's. She's now kicked upstairs to some cushy make-work job on the business side, earning $60K annually. RexTyler 13 January 2007

Deletion due to WP:BLP

[.... deleted comment that provides no sources for what the commenter "recalls", as per WP:BLP. --NYScholar (talk) 19:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)][reply]

Reference to 52-story day-care needs to be sourced

For the person who wanted a reference to this ... was in a cartoon today: Day-care center joke Once I saw the cartoon, I knew it would end up on this page. Hardnfast 01:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was me who wanted to know the source. I'm now coming "up to speed" on the whole "Wikipedia Scanner" news story as it relates to The New York Times. Funny cartoon now that I know the context. Given all of the other organizations that have been given more prominent attention in the news coverage I've read about the Wikipedia Scanner, I still don't think this is a major enough event to warrant inclusion into the the Times article, though. First draft of history 01:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, just thought the person who wanted a reference for this would like to know it was a joke not a legitimate edit. Hardnfast 10:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Political Leanings

What are the political leanings of Aurthur Ochs Sulzberger and other New York Times owners?

It seems that this is a key detail and should be a part of this article.

24.8.106.182 (talk) 21:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missing citations; plagiarism from sources

This article needs proper source citations (notes) throughout to show sources of its statements throughout. It currently shows evidene of plagiarism and violates WP:V and WP:BLP#Sources; see templates and links to WP:POL within them. Those who added material to this article need to provide their sources in citations throughout. Thank you. --NYScholar (talk) 20:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Source citations to the book by Tifft and Jones needs exact page references throughout to document any statements deriving from their book. (See "preview" mode of article for editorial interpolation re: that problem.) Thanks.--NYScholar (talk) 20:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No spam

Amazon.com advertisements for books are not proper format in "References" in place of proper ISBN nos. (Wikified links), which lead to WorldCat and other search facilities for publication information about editions of books. Earlier I substituted the ISBN nos. for links to Amazon.com throughout. Wikipedia articles are not supposed to advertise books or authors; see WP:Spam. The ISBN nos. and precise publishing information are better format for "References" and notes citations. --NYScholar (talk) 20:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This entry is an embarrassment to Wikipedia. I was merely seeking some info on the publisher of the nation's paper of record -- only to find a limited and largely uninformative article way below the normal standard I have come to expect and what other editors insist upon in my own contributions to this on-line compendium. I have no axe to grind; I greatly respect the NY Times but realize its limitations in the modern media context. Why isn't this article more informative, complete and better sourced? Where are the senior editors? (Please forgive my limited formatting -- I am editing on an I-Phone.) Theophilus Reed (talk) 07:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are nearly three million articles on Wikipedia, and it would probably take ten times that many people to make all of those articles FA-status. jj137 (talk) 01:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting the name of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.s son

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr.. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

"Please change Arthur Gregg Sulzberger III to Arthur Gregg Sulzberger"

I know his correct name from several sources: 1) personal communication with Arthur Gregg 2)his byline in the Times (A.G. Sulzberger) where he is now a reporter and 3) an interview with his father in the book "The Trust: The Private and Public Family Behind the New York Times" p.561 in which A. O. Sulzberger, Jr. explains why he purposely gave Arthur Gregg a different middle name from his so that he would NOT be the III. Hydrangean (talk) 17:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC) Hydrangean[reply]

@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 This entry is an embarrassment to Wikipedia. I was merely seeking some info on the publisher of the nation's paper of record -- only to find a limited and largely uninformative article way below the normal standard I have come to expect and what other editors insist upon in my own contributions to this on-line compendium.  I have no axe to grind; I greatly respect the NY Times but realize its limitations in the modern media context.  Why isn't this article more informative, complete and better sourced?  Where are the senior editors?  (Please forgive my limited formatting -- I am editing on an I-Phone.) [[User:Theophilus reed|Theophilus Reed]] ([[User talk:Theophilus reed|talk]]) 07:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 :Because there are nearly three million articles on Wikipedia, and it would probably take ten times that many people to make all of those articles FA-status. &nbsp; [[User:Jj137|jj137]] [[User talk:Jj137|(talk)]] 01:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
+== Correcting the name of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.s son ==
+{{edit semiprotected}} "Please change Arthur Gregg Sulzberger III to Arthur Gregg Sulzberger"
+I know his correct name from several sources: 1) personal communication with Arthur Gregg 2)his byline in the Times (A.G. Sulzberger) where he is now a reporter and 3) an interview with his father in the book "The Trust: The Private and Public Family Behind the New York Times" p.561 in which A. O. Sulzberger, Jr. explains why he purposely gave Arthur Gregg a different middle name from his so that he would NOT be the III.  [[User:Hydrangean|Hydrangean]] ([[User talk:Hydrangean|talk]]) 17:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC) Hydrangean