This article was nominated for deletion on 2 March 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Does MSNBC really count as "alternative" media? It seems to me manyof the media sources on this page are fairly normative and mainstream media sources. Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews liking the Democratic party doesn't seem like it should make them alternative media of the left. LoknarGor (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
If Fox News is included in US Political Right "alternative media" then MSNBC certainly should be included in the US political Left "alternative media" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.140.129.254 (talk) 20:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Should this article be changed to mirror Alternative media (U.S. political right)? Should the two be merged into a single article outlining the history of alternative media in the U.S.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chakrakhan (talk • contribs) 15:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't think so, the two phenomena are quite distinct.
The result of the move request was: moved back DrStrauss talk 17:53, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
List of alternative media (U.S. political left) → ? – As it stands, the title of this article fails WP:PRECISE since List of alternative media does not exist. However, I do not think that title is helpful since it sounds ambiguous. There is probably a clearer title for the content of this article that neither needs a disambiguator nor is List of alternative media, but at the present time, I am not seeing the new title. Steel1943 (talk) 13:53, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Should Secular Talk & The David Pakman Show be listed? Both appear on YouTube, TDPS also appears on Radio. Disaster Area (talk) 19:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: Re: your recent edits, you mention notability.
1) I think you have incorrectly applied the notability criteria. You're applying the ones that apply to the creating the article ITSELF. These conditions do not apply within an article according to WP policies: Wikipedia:Notability
2) Separate to this, I think we need to have a looser definition of what constitutes as 'notable' anyway as by the very definition, alternate media won't be as widely known or recognized by most people. How can we apply notability to something that is so intrinsically non-notable?
3) I've used Alexa to look at DavidPakman.com - which I'm sure you and most would agree is a reasonable alternate media site to compare. The Alexa ranking of this site is 368,892. DemocracyNow.org - 26,720. KPFA.org (Pacifica Evening News) - 341,647. PopularResistance.org - 202,533. Caitlinjohnstone.com - 286,435. This should go some way to giving some indication that if a particular Wikipedia editor hasn't heard of a site, that others may have and therefore it should be included.
4) The fact you removed Pacifica Evening News is astounding. KPFA are the oldest independent radio/news station in the USA. They went off air twice in the 1970s because the KKK bombed their antennas. They've broadcast their interviews with Che Guevara, Alan Ginsberg, Paul Robeson, Richard Pryor, etc. Won all sorts of literary and broadcast awards. Won lawsuits with the FCC over first amendment/profanity issues. The fact that you consider this a non-notable outlet is quite frankly bizarre.
5) You started reverted my edits within 29 minutes of my last edit. This would reasonably suggest that you did not do any real research on the 12 sites you removed and just decided to arbitrarily remove them. Infact, I added over 30 various sources to this article, so it seems you did your due dilligence on 30+ sources in 29 minutes? Let's be honest, we both know you didn't do any of this did you? Your last edit before this was at 17:37 to Aurelia Plath, only 16 minutes before your edit. This would then suggest you reviewed 30+ links for what you consider notability in no more than 16 minutes? This is highly improbable.
6) There is also nothing saying the links within this page must be Wikipedia articles only. External links appear to be acceptable.
7) In light of the above, I will add some of these links back into the article and I hope you and others will find this acceptable Apeholder (talk) 03:05, 7 October 2019 (UTC)