Talk:Der Spiegel: Difference between revisions
personal attacks, not on topic and against Wikipedia talk page guidelines |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject Magazines|class=|importance=}} |
{{WikiProject Magazines|class=|importance=}} |
||
{{WikiProject Germany|class=start|unref=yes|importance=High}} |
{{WikiProject Germany|class=start|unref=yes|importance=High}} |
||
== SPON verbietet Kommentare bei unangenehmen Themen == |
|||
ohne Komm.: http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/0,1518,763938,00.html |
|||
mit Komm. (Norm): http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/0,1518,763832,00.html <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/217.72.216.53|217.72.216.53]] ([[User talk:217.72.216.53|talk]]) 08:58, 22 May 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Spiegel Online Forum löscht/zensiert vor Veröffentlichung jedes Posts == |
|||
Die Forenmoderation dort ist berüchtigt für das demokratienegierende Unterschlagen von ungewollten Meinungen. Als Moderator dort würde ich mich an seiner Stelle nicht mehr im Spiegel ansehen können. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/217.72.216.156|217.72.216.156]] ([[User talk:217.72.216.156|talk]]) 15:19, 17 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=de&q=spiegel+forum+zensiert&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/217.72.216.156|217.72.216.156]] ([[User talk:217.72.216.156|talk]]) 23:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
: Hey German countryman, it is not polite to write in German in the English wikipedia. (And your accusal that the sysops on the "Spiegel discussion board" do not respect freedom of speech is not founded and unnecessary here). --[[Special:Contributions/87.78.93.231|87.78.93.231]] ([[User talk:87.78.93.231|talk]]) 02:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC) Robert |
|||
You stupid lying jerk, i proved it <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/217.72.216.53|217.72.216.53]] ([[User talk:217.72.216.53|talk]]) 13:06, 19 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Neither does a simple google search prove anything, nor is there any cause for such poor behavior. You don't even seem to have the slightest idea what freedom of speech means. Private entities can do whatever they want, as long as they do it with their own property or property for which the property holder granted usage rights. For private entities, it is absolutely impossible to violate freedom of speech without breaking any laws. For example, they are not allowed to come to your house to destroy your computer from which you broadcast your opinion, unless you grant them permission. However, they don't have to grant you the right to use their servers or spray their housewalls, as it is their property. Learning this difference before resorting to such inane statements might be a wise time investment. [[User:Makrom|Makrom]] ([[User talk:Makrom|talk]]) 04:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Stefan Aust == |
== Stefan Aust == |
Revision as of 19:40, 20 April 2012
Magazines Unassessed | |||||||||||||
|
Germany Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Stefan Aust
Under Stance and Issues it says Stefan Aust took over in 2002 but elsewhere says 1994. Which is right? I assume its 1994 but knowing nothing at all about the Spiegel (only on here to research it) am unwilling to change it without checking. If they are both right right in their own way this should be explained more clearly. Stupid Ape 14:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
New Image
I added a new image to this article to show the current layout for the cover of the magazine. I hope this is okay. I know that too many images in an article are frowned upon somewhat, but as this brings the total up to three for the article, I assume that's not too many. I tried to place it where it wouldn't distract, but if someone wants to move it to a different place within the article that looks better, then by all means feel free to move it. -Maaya 22:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
long articles
"...but its long, in-depth articles are more comparable to the Atlantic Monthly or the British Economist."
do you really think that the economist has long articles?
Yes, the Economist does have long articles. The special reports that feature in many issues are about 3,000 words long. The cover Spiegel story runs to about 5,000 or 6,000. The Economist is therefore probably the closest English-language weekly both in content and style. I guess the only problem is that Spiegel is even more mainstream than the Economist is, which is more high-brow and read more by elites. --Geoffrey Miller 07:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
misquotes
this mag is certainly up there with a few other german magazines in misquotes. countless people claim to be misquoted, you mean to tell me they've never been critisied for this?
- People claim to have been misquoted by press publications all the time. If there is any evidence that this happens to the Spiegel more often than to others or that such has been claimed by critics, then maybe you could add it? --SKopp 22:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
plö
(click "spiegel online") http://service.spiegel.de/digas/servlet/find 192.194.84.253 05:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Titelseite.jpg
Image:Titelseite.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Why does the logo improve the article?
What is the logo telling us that isn't already in the cover design? It looks pretty awful, in my opinion, and adds nothing. --John (talk) 05:33, 6 May 2011 (UTC)