User talk:Edbrown05/Old news is unpaid for news at ''New York Times''

it's not a current event. if you want to report on it as an ongoing phenomenon, i.e. as a feature report, then you have to do a heck of a lot better than report something everyone has known for a year and then give your take on it. Wikinews is not a blog, and explicitly forbids editors from commenting on events. instead, you should be talking to someone who's views are worth hearing and report that. couple more things to note - NYT is hardly the sole media outlet to sell its content. Comparing Times Select to your library archives is off-base, keep in mind that your library paid for the papers it archives, and there's nothing to stop your library from subscribing to Select if it wants to provide online access to archives. what you can do is "how does my local library do archiving in the digital world" or "how do commercial news sources compare with publicly funded or free news sources" original reporting. –Doldrums(talk) 11:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC) I skipped past everything you wrote Doldrums. I didn't read it. It doesn't matter. You miss that point. Maybe you will never get it. -Edbrown05 11:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

We get the point Ed, everytime we check a story from NYT, or from Washington Post, etc, and it's no longer available, we think that it makes our life difficult, and that Wikinews does better. Still, this is not news because nothing has recently changed, and the article you wrote is clearly an editorial.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Old_news_is_unpaid_for_news_at_%27%27New_York_Times%27%27"


 * Editorials can go on the blog... If you changed it to a piece where you compare our open archive with several other sources like the NYT it'd be good for that. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)