Talk:Salon (website)

Revise. NOW.--The Madman (talk) 18:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)The Madman

Deletion
OsakaSun has tagged the article for deletion. I agree - the current text is embarrassing. Unless someone is willing to delete it...--ZooGuard (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you mean "unless someone is willing to rewrite it"? I also think it's quite alarming in its current state, and in many ways seems to fly directly in the face of many of the values other RW articles hold. - Grant (Talk) 18:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm working on it, I'm working on it. Of course, you know me, so you might want to have a hand in it.--The Madman (talk) 18:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)The Madman

Are You Bloody Bonkers?
I consider myself more right-wing than left-wing but I don't have a problem with left-wing journalism? Why do you think I don't have a problem being on here? The internet is a form of journalism after all! How can you (rightly) condemn The Huffington Post whilst defending Salon? I mean, when I first went on the website I literally thought it was a parody site. It's like some kind of left equivalent of Conservapedia! Why does everyone take this pile of schlock so seriously? I know that this is a left-leaning site but I didn't think that you all thought it was homophobic to be heterosexual or that so much as showing interest in a woman was sexist or that having the capacity to make money and utilising that capacity to improve your circumstances was immoral or that any and all criticism of Islam was racist! By all means edit my article and add your own views but don't make out that Salon, which by the way is far more moonbattery than The Huff Post is whiter than white! I'm trying to raise awareness of this canker in the hedge of the internet and thereby thwart its diabolical machinations. --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 04:14, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Wasn't the page created...by you....Didn't I delete the..what...who...where....why....Oh, parody...Poe's Law....of course there's accounting for naivety...what...Someone help.--The Madman (talk) 04:34, 13 February 2014 (UTC)The Madman
 * The page is shit, the writing was atrocious, and once I removed all of the crap, there were about two facts left in the article. The whole thing should be taken out back and shot, and the editors who worked on it billed for the bullet. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 04:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeaaaah there's no reason for us to have this. We aren't a crappy Wikipedia, and Salon has diddly to do with the mission.   04:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)