Talk:The Walrus

message: :Image:The Walrus April 2005 cover.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) 02:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The Walrus April 2005 cover.jpg

message: I'm an intern at the magazine and am planning on updating and cleaning up this somewhat neglected page. I'm new to Wikipedia editing, so please bear with me if anything is done inappropriately -- will attempt to the best of my ability to be neutral, summarize edits well, etc. Walrus Intern (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refurbishing 

message: Did he really consider it a "Harper's North"?  Funny, there are so many of these "XYZ-North" things where somebody in Canada (read: Toronto) decides that some American institution has to be replicated north of the U.S./Canada border -- generally to make money (um, part of the "1%"?  think: Occupy Wall Street).  
Hollywood-North, Madison Avenue-North, Silicon Valley North, Nashville-North, North-by-Northeast; you name it, it's always a copy of something American.  We lament how much control America has over Canada's culture ...
... yet those same persons who lament eagerly chomp at the bit to create some sort of new "XYZ North" -- as long as it benefits Toronto.  Or the region around it.
And therein lies the rub.  Practically every one of these "XYZ North" entities is actually in Southern Ontario.  Which is about as far south as you can get in Canada without actually stumbling into the United States.  Many "XYZ-North" thingies (and their jobs) are actually further south than a number of large American cities.
Frankly, I think that there should be an intellectual property right associated with the "-North" part of any "XYZ-North" moniker.  That is, if you want to create "XYZ-North", it better truly be "north"; as in, north of the 49th parallel.
Which would pretty well shut out all of Southern Ontario and Southern Quebec.
--Atikokan (talk) 15:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Harper's North" 

message: Most contributors in The Walrus#Selected contributors have blue-links.  The rest are not linked.  The rules for redlinks say topics that potentially merit an article can be linked.  They recommend not removing redlinks, for topics that potentially merit articles.  So I linked the rest of the contributors.  Geo Swan (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Redlinks