This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Slate (magazine) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
Christopher Hitchens should be removed as a current contributor. 168.166.80.136 ( talk) 15:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Somewhat like a conservative Salon.com
You're kidding. Conservative? Maybe somewhat center-leaning, but I think it leans from the left -- or am I confusing Michael Kinsley's resume with his work? ♥ «Charles A. L.» 18:40, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
I just removed a duplicate mention of the Washington Post purchase. - DavidWBrooks 18:04, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
For what it's worth, Paul Boutin just published an article on Slate critiqueing Wikipedia for lack of accuracy. He mentioned various things about the Slate article being wrong...maybe these should be fixed before Slate-users flock over and find he is right? Aerothorn 04:19, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
Is there any business or financial info on Slate.com as there is on Salon.com?
Please see Chatterbox Goes To War. Rmharman 06:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm don't think I'd classify Slate's stance as Progressive. It's hard to pin these things down, because the terminology evolves pretty rapidly in response to media attitudes, but it seems to me that in current usage, "progressive" refers to people who want the Democratic Party to tack left -- progressives favor single-payer healthcare, openly argue for progressive taxation, want more gov't and corporate transparency, etc. Self-described progressives generally denounce Bush/GOP policies far more vocally than the average Democratic politician. The Progressive Caucus, at least at the CA Dem Convention, seemed to be drawing heavily on the membership of California for Democracy (which is of course an offshoot of the 2004 Dean campaign). Slate is not in this camp; it's pretty blatantly DLC/neo-liberal. (The presence of Bruce Reed as a regular contributor is kind of a giveaway!) I would guess that the only Slate columnist who would comfortably fit in with the current crop of progressives is Tim Noah. "Liberal" remains a reasonable umbrella term for both the neo-liberals and progressives. I'll refrain from making this change immediately, to give time for a response, but if I don't see the response before the next time I check up on my Watchlist (probably a week or two), I plan on reverting "progressive" to "liberal". Cheers, Rmharman 18:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Given that there is significant political debate over whether Iraq is part of the War on Terror, or was a distraction from the "real" war (in Afghanistan, and in terms of securing the homeland -- ports, chemical plants, etc), this link seems inappropriate for the NPOV. Rmharman 21:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Chris Suellentrop used to write Culturebox as well, now he write a NY TimesSelect blog and contributes to Wired.
David Edelstein was Slate's movie critic from 1996 until January of this year, when he moved to New York Magazine and was replaced by Dana Stevens. Stevens no longer writes Surfergirl, TV reviews are now written by Troy Patterson. Invisible Cliché 23:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
What's with the salon.com reference? I'm confused why this is in here. I don't see any reason for a comparison to salon in the opening definition. Can someone explain why this is relevant (and add this to the article) or should this be removed? Timbatron 06:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Article starts "Slate is an online news and culture magazine created in 1996 by former New Republic editor Michael Kinsley and owned by Microsoft (as part of MSN). On 21 December 2004, it was purchased by the Washington Post Company." Does that mean it's now owned by the Washington Post Company instead of Microsoft? Can someone clarify and/or fix? Thanks, A bit iffy 16:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
This article has gotten out of date, especially with the listing of contributors some of whom are no longer frequent contributors (though like Plotz not necessarily gone) or writing different items. Also, it appears to me that the listing is overly generous as to who is notable enough to be mentioned. Before being bold, I thought I'd see if there was some consensus on certain items. I suggest at a minimum that a wikipedia stub exist to count as a "notable contributor" (and Ron Rosenbaum really needs to be listed), although I don't think we should insist on stubs for regular contributors. As for how many contributions should be made to qualify, I'm thinking 4-6 articles at least 1 of which was in the last two years, to make "notable contributors", and at least 4 articles in the last year to be listed as a regular. Slate's search function allows author searches and date sorting, so it shouldn't be too hard to check. Alternately, assuming they do a 2008 listing of staff and their presidential votes, that would be a pretty good test of who Slate thinks their people are. Also, the newer blogs like XX Factor and Trailhead (at least for a few more weeks) should probably be mentioned. Any thoughts? CAVincent ( talk) 02:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
"The scheme didn't work; in February 1999, Slate returned to free content, citing both sluggish subscription sales and increased advertising revenue." Shouldn't this sentence say that they switched back to free content because of decreased ad revenues under the subscription scheme? Oughgh ( talk) 18:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
In the past few hours, http://www.slate.com/ seems to've begun redirecting straight to http://www.washingtonpost.com/ and URLs inside the site are dead. Is this a temporary glitch or has Slate been shut down? -- Gwern (contribs) 19:38 25 March 2010 (GMT)
This section is going to need some major sourcing to remove original research and introduce reliable third-party sources or the whole section will have to go. There is no source for any of the subjective claims such as a "neo-liberal point of view", Mickey Kaus's "favorite subjects", taking a "liberal hawk" perspective, "increasingly critical of the war", etc. etc. This analysis seems to have been done by an editor going through these articles. It reads like one person's opinion of slate, but who is that person? The only source for any of this is links to primary sources, articles by various slate contributors, but nowhere is there a link to any reliable third-party analysis. For that matter, even talking about the vote totals is WP:OR as these totals are not presented anyway, an editor apparently went though all of those pages and counted up the total. I'll remove it soon if no sourcing can be found. -- Loonymonkey ( talk) 15:19, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Is Slate politically liberal? I believe the general consensus is yes but my research in incomplete. Here's a relevant and entertaining article on the subject. Thoughts? -- Nstrauss ( talk) 18:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Should be moved to notable "past" contributors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.165.82 ( talk) 07:56, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
The Fray comments section available at the end of most articles provided an early and very (for it's time) technically sophisticated forum for commentary by the readership. many news websites have this now but I believe Slate was an early adopter. The Fray was a point of difference with other upmarket magazines moving online. It would be a useful addition if some Slate afficionado could add material to the main page about this. They might even win a star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.175.209.142 ( talk) 13:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Is Slate a left wing magazine? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.79.100.32 ( talk) 10:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to recommend adding Rebecca Schuman to this list. In accordance with the WikiProject Magazines' writing guide, these sections (if they exist at all) should include only those contributors whose "involvement with the magazine . . . has generated coverage in independent reliable sources." Schuman's work has been covered on NPR and in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Minneapolis Star Tribune, and many other sources. Any thoughts? DinzdalePR ( talk) 20:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
The article on Panoply Media, of which Slate is a parent company, is being considered for deletion. Your fellow editors are seeking more opinions on this discussion. Morganfitzp ( talk) 03:43, 20 February 2017 (UTC)