Talk:New York Post

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New York Post article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 90 days

New York City Mid‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Newspapers High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism High‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about New York Post. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about New York Post at the Reference desk.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-new-york-daily-news-coverage-235670

Banning NYP as cited source.

The problem with New York Post is that when it comes to politician (ex. Jamaal Bowman, Ilhan Omar, etc.), it has high bias towards them, favoring the rights. In review, the New York Post tends to publish stories utilizing sensationalized headlines with emotionally loaded wording [1]

It is very biased that this should not be allowed as cited sources. the headline misleadingly exaggerates the actual story they are reporting.

New York Post - Bias and Credibility - Media Bias/Fact Check (mediabiasfactcheck.com) 174.135.36.220 (talk) 04:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship requests are normally made on Wikipedia's reliable sources noticeboard, the most recent discussion of New York Post was in March. This is the wrong talk page. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 13:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppsie. 174.135.36.220 (talk) 18:52, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, @Peter Gulutzan. It is archived meaning I can no longer response. 174.135.36.220 (talk) 23:27, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a consolation, the Wikipedia article now says "In 2024, the Wikipedia community reached a consensus that the Post should not be used as a source, especially with regard to politics." This is false, but sourced, so I think it will stay. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, The Post is banned as source. in Politics, now that a win. The Problem is that it always wrote negatively about the squad or any progressive or even democratic politician in general. 174.135.36.220 (talk) 05:02, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thread opened at WP:RSN about actions here

See WP:RSN#When RS document Wikipedia's actions... -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging: @Isi96, LeadPoisoning, Arcturus95, Objective3000, and TanRabbitry: -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if this is really a question for WP:RSN (surely we all agree that the Jewish Telegraphic Agency is reliable?), but I agree that this should be included. There is no policy saying that we have to pretend Wikipedia doesn't exist; see Category:Wikipedia for instance. That the English Wikipedia community considers the New York Post unreliable is a relevant, significant fact supported by a reliable source. I see no reason not to exclude it.

I would say "English Wikipedia" rather than just Wikipedia. – Joe (talk) 12:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:RSN thread has been archived. Some (most?) editors seemed dubious about putting it back in, and I took the opportunity to note again that it's false, but now an IP has put it back in and nobody's denying that it's sourced, so I guess we're done here. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 13:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The inaccuracy is worse than anyone realised. The RfC actually decided that the Post was "more reliable" before Murdoch bought it in 1976. The Post was a broadsheet until 1942. There was no discussion of the broadsheet and there was no suggestion that it was not reliable. James500 (talk) 18:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Murdoch Propaganda Rag.

Let's stop beating around the bush. NYP is propaganda. Lizard1959 (talk) 14:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]