Talk:WION
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WION 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 |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 | The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
What is the editorial stance of this news channel?
editI did a quick google search but wasn't able to find any info. Here are some examples: Example 1 Example 2. -- Somedifferentstuff (talk) 14:16, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
That is what I cam here seeking as well, because I saw a video[1] in which they repeatedly referred to COVID-19 as "the Wuhan virus." Perhaps this is normal in India, but in most of the rest of the English speaking world it belies a very particular (conspiratorial) conservative perspective. --76.24.24.247 (talk) 22:25, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- Please refer to these sources, to expand on the Editorial stance/Bias.[2][3]Venkat TL (talk) 13:53, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Venkat TL, I was planning to add this section to the article but [3] seems a very specific case of bias about the "absence of reportage at USA covid wave". Adding these things to the media bias section doesnt seem to be the norm as seen in nyt or fox news article. The Media Bias analysis section seems more appropriate to be added. >>> Extorc.talk(); 12:45, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Please read the full article. That was their made up lie. Perfect example of fake news. Why wont you add it? Venkat TL (talk) 12:52, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- What I'm saying is that such instances do not exist in articles for fox news and nyt articles. If the consensus is that such individual instances should be added in those articles as well, then I don't have any problem doing so. >>> Extorc.talk(); 13:03, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Please read the full article. That was their made up lie. Perfect example of fake news. Why wont you add it? Venkat TL (talk) 12:52, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOphIpddRAk
- ^ "WION (World is One News)". Media Bias/Fact Check. Retrieved 1 November 2021.
- ^ a b Munjal, Diksha. "How News18 and WION anchors imagined a 'western media bias' in Covid reporting". Newslaundry. Retrieved 1 November 2021.
Encyclopedic significance?
editIf I see that right, WION is just some YT-Channel with an imposter name trying to appear like an American news outlet, posting very clickbaity "news" with even more clickbaity images to generate channel views. There are thousands of those. I suggest deletion.2A01:599:744:59D9:95BF:8E88:13DB:6158 (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
The BBC had a piece on questioning the validity of media coming out of India. I don't want to put words in their mouth so read for yourself.
Editorial content and quality
editI tried to add the following content to the article:
According to Media Bias/Fact Check, WION reports international news with little bias, but also publishes tabloid-style stories that may be misleading. (sourced to [1])
But this was removed as WP:UNDUE. According to WP:UNDUE, "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in those sources." As this is literally the only reliable source that exists concerning WION's overall editorial content and quality, I don't see how it can be UNDUE. There is no policy on Wikipedia saying that you can't include information from a single source when there are no other sources covering that specific information. What are other people's opinion on this? Nosferattus (talk) 05:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not a reliable source, there isn't one there are apparently none. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 05:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- FYI, I was not the IP that just reinserted the sentence. If other folks have opinions about it, please share here. Nosferattus (talk) 19:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Honestly, I'm not completely sure if Media Bias/Fact Check is a reliable source or not. According to a peer-review study, "While [Media Bias/Fact Check's] credibility is sometimes questioned, it has been regarded as accurate enough to be used as ground-truth for e.g. media bias classifiers, fake news studies, and automatic fact-checking systems."[2] Does anyone else have a take on it? Nosferattus (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)