Talk:Daily Mail
Contents |
[edit] Brooker
Anybody remember Charlie Brooker's Daily Mail Island? Camembert Electrique (talk) 00:15, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Bloody hell, how old is that?
theist 00:32, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Cites PrisonPlanet
Here: The girl had been home-schooled by her mother but wanted to start going to a regular school, which required her to take a number of immunisations, reports Prisonplanet.com. Really?--ZooGuard (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Climate denial
I confused the Daily Fail with the Telegraph when it comes to Monckton. Melanie Phillips is the Fail's resident denier and I see them peddling a lot of "soft" denialism in the rest of the paper. I came across this which claims they've changed their editorial stance but I definitely recall a lot of denialist hit pieces besides just Phillips. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 21:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Silver?
Someone changed this to silver without discussion. I'm not sure it's fully ready. Discuss?
Liquid Blue 03:10, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- What do you think it needs? ТyAsk me about frog-backed securities 03:34, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- It covers all the necessary topics, what else? Osaka Sun (talk) 03:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm, well I guess I'm not a fan of "Best of..." sections. I could live with its being kept and moving the article up to silver, though.
Liquid Blue 03:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'll admit the snark is laid on rather thick, but honestly it seems pretty ok. ТyAsk me about frog-backed securities 04:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see the snark getting in the way of the information. the only thing I don't like is the quote at the top - should we be quoting ourselves? There are lots of good DM jokes out there. SophieWilder 08:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see a problem with quoting ourselves, as long as it's really good. Admittedly, the current one isn't. But I like quote snark at the top of articles—a layer of snark frosting on top of the big fact cake.
Radioactive Misanthrope 08:45, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- As long as it's not overdone, it's good. SophieWilder 08:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- The day we're as bad as Uncyclopedia is the day I hang myself.
Radioactive Misanthrope 08:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- The day we're as bad as Uncyclopedia is the day I hang myself.
- As long as it's not overdone, it's good. SophieWilder 08:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see a problem with quoting ourselves, as long as it's really good. Admittedly, the current one isn't. But I like quote snark at the top of articles—a layer of snark frosting on top of the big fact cake.
- I don't see the snark getting in the way of the information. the only thing I don't like is the quote at the top - should we be quoting ourselves? There are lots of good DM jokes out there. SophieWilder 08:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'll admit the snark is laid on rather thick, but honestly it seems pretty ok. ТyAsk me about frog-backed securities 04:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm, well I guess I'm not a fan of "Best of..." sections. I could live with its being kept and moving the article up to silver, though.
- It covers all the necessary topics, what else? Osaka Sun (talk) 03:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
To my mind it still needs some basic copy-editing for grammar and sentence structure.
Генгисpillaging
08:52, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Femail sidebar
The Daily Mash - totally want to add this as a reference. It's the sort of thing that's being satirical by being factual.
pathetic 11:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
[edit] Howto: ignore Femail
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Daily_Mail#Femail
"Femail dominates the right hand margin of the Mail's website - usually extending several times the length of all other content - meaning that even if you only care about the political or medical stances of the paper while reading online, you certainly won't be able to escape the latest mega-important headlines about Kim Kardashian's latest photo-shoot or Victoria Beckham's latest publicity stunt."
I dunno about that :) Can someone who speaks wiki better than me put in a RW-style comedy reference that says that these two AdBlock element hiding rules will mean only the Mail's "intellectual" content is visible?
dailymail.co.uk##div.femail
dailymail.co.uk##div.tvshowbiz
92.40.255.77 (talk) 15:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
[edit] Currently?
As I no longer live in the UK and I don't read the Mail I'm not sure if this statement from this section is still relevant:
- The Mail is currently blaming the European Union and European immigration to Britain for the economic crisis in Britain.
"Currently" is always a bad word to use a you never know when it was written, and I thought things were looking up in the UK.--Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 11:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
[edit] Zinoviev Letter
Lord Northcliffe died in 1922. His brother Lord Rothermere owned the paper by the time of the Zinoviev Letter. --Romartus (talk) 13:44, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
[edit] "only Rupert Murdoch's Sun is worse"
I object to this statement because at least The Sun doesn't pretend to be anything but a tabloid rag. People reading The Daily Mail are lead to believe it's not a common tabloid. — Unsigned, by: 85.211.186.54 / talk / contribs
[edit] "Hotel killers"
While the other articles listed are certainly worthy of mockery, I don't see the problem with being outraged that murderers were released from jail and given jobs at a hotel. Thanos6 (talk) 04:47, 24 October 2014 (UTC)