Talk:Broadsheet

message: This article is way too UK-centric.  You would think from this article that there were only six broadsheets in the entire world.  Descriptions of the UK newspaper industry should probably be moved to a separate article.  (In my collection, I believe I can come closer to 300, and that's just in the US.)  18.24.0.120 02:35, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: UK-centricity

message: Maybe the aricle is "way" too U.K-centric, but no more so than most articles we Americans write about things are U.S.-centric.
:I'll leave it to others to write the article on U.S. broadsheets -- somebody out there in the Wiki-verse must be far more knowledgable about it than myself.  But I think that I can say which U.K. papers are which politically.  The Times and the Telegraph are the right-wing entries in question, the Guardian and the Independent are the left-wing ones, unless things have changed very drastically very recently.
::Rlquall 15:40, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I always thought The Times was fairly balanced, perhaps a tiny bit right-wing, but of all the newspapers the most unpredictable in its politics. --Taras 02:23, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's Who 

message: Could someone add the physical dimensions of the paper? Rmhermen 05:31, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
:I was about to say "yes, I wonder where I could find that out" when I realised I have Saturday's Guardian downstairs. So I can definitively say that it measures 14¾ by 23½ inches (or 29½ by 23½ if you want the size of an open spread, which I suppose is more sensible). Assuming the "tabloid" sections inside, and my local free paper, are genuinely the same size as tabloids (which makes sense in terms of standardised equipment), they're exactly half: 11¾ by 14¾ (23½ by 14¾ opened out). I think I'll add that to both articles. - IMSoP 22:33, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, is it an ISO standard like A4? if not, how is it encyclopedic? as a concept for "very big newspaper"? This article needs more information of broadsheet as either a standard size or a cultural concept.--Esteban Barahona (talk) 18:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: How big?

message: We have to consider with this article whether: 
- we see broadsheets as all serious newspapers 
- or we see broadsheets as newspapers with a broadsheet size. 
The Independent on Sunday will soon be a tabloid, so it won't be possible to have 
'The Independent on Sunday' (The Independent is now a compact). 
Perhaps there should be a separate section listing compacts on this page?
::I work in the Press Cutting industry, ex-broadsheets are now called "Quality". So you have Tabloid (Sun, Mirror), Mid-Range (Daily Mail), Quality (The Guardian, The Times) and Broadsheet. I'll try to find something on the NLAs page, and maybe put a note in Connotations. ~ Mlk 14:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broadsheet in content or size? 

message: G2 is now half-Berliner; Times 2 is a tabloid supplement to a compact.
I had a go at re-editing the section about the supplements, but I'm still not happy with it.  I'm not sure how many UK tabloid supplements there really are to broadsheets; the only broadsheets left will be the Telegraph and the Sunday Times once the Observer follows the Guardian to Berliner and the Sindie follows the Indie to compact.
Well, plus the Herald and the Yorkshire Post (are there any other regional broadsheets?).
Of those, the Telegraph doesn't carry tabloid supplements as far as I know, but the Herald does.  The Sunday Times has so many sections, some in tabloid, some in broadsheet, some in A4 and some in even smaller sizes that the G2-style "features section" isn't really an appropriate model.
Perhaps we should discuss G2/T2 as something that newspapers used to do, rather than do?
--Po8crg 11:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supplements 

message: From the article:
:a leading English language daily newspaper from India, followed closely by USA Today and The New York Times from the United States, 
USA Today is not in the broadsheet format, is it? It seems tiny compared to the New York Times. AxelBoldt 16:40, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  USA Today? 

message: "Some tabloid papers (particularly the Daily Mail and Daily Express) often use phrases such as "broadsheet quality in a tabloid format" to distinguish themselves from the "tabloid" reputation."
It's worth noting here that the Mail and Express were originally published in broadsheet format (as were the Times, Guardian, and Independent), only to change to a smaller format at a later date. Yet the Mail and Express are now regarded as "tabloid", whereas the others are still considered "broadsheet". What's the difference? 217.155.20.163 23:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subjective definitions? 

message: Maariv and Yedioth Aharonoth are published in tabloid format, except for the weekend edition (which is broadsheet). Makor Rishon is also a tabloid, as far as I know).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.250.108.130 (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual Mistakes - Israeli Newspapers 

message: The list of US broadsheets opens with this text:
United States
Almost all major U.S. newspapers are broadsheets, including major publications like:
This seems redundant to me in the extreme.  There are literally hundreds of newspapers in the US; we should either create a single list by format (perhaps including circulation) or create an exception list - if almost all papers are broadsheet, let's list the very few that are not instead of 10% of the ones that are.  The idea to me would be to add sheet sizes to the List of newspapers in the United States by circulation article and indicate that it is only the top X of US newspapers.  
We'll obviously need to build a consensus around altering List of newspapers in the United States by circulation, but at the very least I think we should reverse the polarity of the list present in this article.  Using the references cited earlier in paragraph, I'll replace the list of US broadsheets with exceptions - IF there is a consensus - beginning at 0000UTC on 14 Nov 2009.
The Oregonian has converted to stapled compact/tabloid format: http://www.oregonlive.com/multimedia/index.ssf/2014/04/the_oregonians_new_compact_new.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.76.45.151 (talk) 22:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundancy in US Broadsheet list 

message: does not work properly. Peter Horn User talk 21:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversion bug 

message: This article and Broadside (printing) cite each other as synonyms. Broadside (printing) is very short . . . effectively a stub, although not tagged as such. It would make sense to merge the content of Broadside (printing) into this article and replace it with a redirect. (The disambiguation page would also have to be modified.)--Pat Berry (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the merger proposal pursuant to the comment at Talk:Broadside (printing).  Ecphora (talk) 01:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:NewspaperSizes200508.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: very distracting! can someone make a different page that lists all that, or a table or something? i have no clue how to do this. but it looks hard to read like this. Cmmartinez326 (talk) 17:22, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  giant list of countries 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Broadsheet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100205045739/http://www.nls.uk/broadsides/background.html to http://www.nls.uk/broadsides/background.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120507111000/http://mindpark.se/mindpark-49-tabloidtisdagen-%E2%80%93-5-oktober-2004/ to http://mindpark.se/mindpark-49-tabloidtisdagen-%E2%80%93-5-oktober-2004/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified