Talk:Technique (newspaper)

The good article status of this article is being reassessed by the community to determine whether the article meets the good article criteria. Please add comments to the reassessment page.

^{Date: 03:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)}

Technique (newspaper) has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 30, 2004	Articles for deletion	Kept
February 21, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
April 7, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
April 24, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
November 10, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Georgia Tech (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia Tech, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Georgia TechWikipedia:WikiProject Georgia TechTemplate:WikiProject Georgia TechGeorgia Tech articles

Georgia (U.S. state): Atlanta Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia 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.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Atlanta task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Atlanta task force To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate Atlanta related articles from Unassessed Atlanta articles and Category:Unknown-importance Atlanta articles.
Citing sources : Unreferenced Atlanta articles
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Infobox : Atlanta articles without infoboxes
Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Atlanta
Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Atlanta
Stubs : Work on stubs in Category:Atlanta stubs.
Other : * Help out with articles placed in Category:Atlanta articles needing attention
- Add {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)|class=|importance=|atlanta=|atlanta-importance=}} project banner to Atlanta-related articles to talk pages and assess.
- Maintain and further improve articles already of high-quality.
- Get Atlanta into Featured article status.
- Improve groups of articles to meet the standards for a Good or Featured Topic.

WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)...
Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles.
Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category.
Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data
Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes
Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state)
Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state)
Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs.
Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting
- Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention
- Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
- Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner.
- Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard

Journalism Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Newspapers Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mackay Radio
Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

The paper creation process

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It seems to me the entire paragraph starting with "The paper is first assembled..." is pretty much superfluous. It is not asimilar to what any other newspaper is set up like and does not strike me as encyclopedic knowledge. I've not removed it for the moment, but if no one opposes within a few weeks (or whenever I remember) I probably will. --Elepsis 22:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree with your comment. If the paragraph stays it should be edited to be more accurate to the actual process at the least. --Entertainingfate 1:14, 6 Novemeber 2006 (UTC)

Title and format

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It looks as though the definite article was an historic part of the paper's title, but that this is not true of the current paper. If so, shouldn't the article instead be moved to Technique (newspaper) or something similar? Also, is it really printed in tabloid format? I realize this refers strictly to dimensions and not content, but while I've not held a copy in my hands, it looks like neither a tabloid nor broadsheet, maybe a Berliner or something. Just curious, anyone care to break out a ruler? -Tobogganoggin ^talk 06:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've been thinking about moving the page, yes. And I'm fairly certain that it's considered a tabloid-size newspaper. The image on the article was captured from a PDF, and doesn't necessarily represent the dimensions of the actual paper. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 06:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

GA pass

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have reviewed this article and believe it meets criteria at WP:WIAGA. I think the article is a well referenced and well written piece about a college newspaper. I also think considering it is a school newspaper and not a national publication the article is broad enough for GA class. However to improve especially if considering nominating to FAC then a few parts could do with expanding. Firstly the history section? Perhaps a list of some of the more contentious articles/issues of the past? Or perhaps a list of some (if any) famous contributors from the past, who have now gone on to other things? I have placed a few wikilinks I thought were missing as well. Anyway good job to all those who contributed to improve! LordHarris 10:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

GA sweeps

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Lampman (talk) 15:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Broken links to Technique website

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

It is clear from the sheer number of broken links to the Technique website from various articles on Wikipedia (numbering over a hundred) that some major sea change has happened there. No media web site for a public institution would break links on its website en masse like this unless it was done intentionally to distance itself from past reporting. The breakage coincided in time with the loss of the famous "Two Bits", as we read here, as well. There is nothing in this article to indicate what sort of conservative takeover led to this. It should explain something. Please add it. -130.207.229.86 (talk) 11:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Two Bits was discontinued because all of the writers graduated, and didn't recruit anyone to replace them. The website was broken because they redesigned it and weren't bothered to include the archives. You can still access all of the Technique content through the Georgia Tech Library here, but I haven't had the time to go through and update all of the links. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 13:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

And while we're talking about media sites breaking links, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is particularly notorious about that; articles from just a few years ago have rarely been accessible, much less the kind of age I'd need for the research I focus on around here. So at least we have the Georgia Tech Library to archive the GT student publications for us. :3 —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 13:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Technique. 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/20080414153020/http://www.nique.net/pdf/ads/adsbrochure.pdf to http://www.nique.net/pdf/ads/adsbrochure.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cyberbuzz.gatech.edu/anak/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:39, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on The Technique. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA concerns

Latest comment: 9 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

After Wikipedia:Featured article review/ANAK Society/archive1, Wikipedia:Featured article review/Tech Tower/archive1, Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Traditions of the Georgia Institute of Technology/1, and other similar discussions, a lot of the older good/featured content related to Georgia Tech is just not up to the modern GA standards. Unfortunately, this article isn't really there either.

Some concerns of mine are:

Circulation figures provided are from an advertising piece from over 15 years ago
Content is not up to date in all areas, for instance " As of the 2005–2006 publication year, the paper has also taken a hiatus the week prior to spring break"
Sourcing is generally non-independent, primary to articles from the newspaper itself and almost all sources used are affiliated with Georgia Tech, including an .xls spreadsheet from 2007
There is unsourced content throughout, especially in the Slivers section.
Source-text integrity has some issue; for instance The Two Bits column had been discontinued in 2010, but was brought back in 2012, to again be discontinued in 2013 is sourced to an editorial by Two Bits that is from 2012 and thus cannot support and does not mention the 2013 discontinuation and does not mention 2010 either
It seems unusual to have an entire section related to one advertising controversy from 1995

I think this article needs good article reassessment and a general rewrite. Hog Farm _Talk 04:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic