Talk:The Harvard Crimson/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

"oldest continuously-published"

I see someone changed "the oldest continuously-published" to "one of the oldest continuously-published." While that makes the statement vacuously true, I don't think weasel-wording is an adequate substitute for a reference.

How about it? Where does the statement that it is the oldest continuously-published daily college newspaper come from? If we can't have a source, how about we just say it was founded in 1873 and let it go at that?

As for "continuously published," the description of the wartime years leads me to wonder whether the "Harvard Service News" should, in fact, count as being the "same" publication as the Crimson. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I note with interest that the Yale Daily News claims to be "the nation's oldest college daily newspaper.[1]." Brubacher, John S. (1997). Higher Education in Transition. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 1560009179. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help), p. 137, says "After the Civil War... on almost every campus a publication was established which modeled its form, content, and purpose on regular daily newspapers. The Yale Daily News, first to be founded, is still in operation. The Harvard Crimson began in 1873 as a more newsy rival of The Advocate. Ten years later, it merged with a competitor to become a daily."

With regard to Cambridge daily newspapers, I also note that the Crimson itself claims only to be "is the only breakfast-table daily newspaper in Cambridge, MA."[2] This would seem to me to carry a strong implication that Cambridge must have an afternoon daily. Anyone know anything about this?

Newspaper fact box

How about a fact box with an image of a full front page to liven up the article. See Cherwell (newspaper) 219.77.174.120 08:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Source citations needed

This article suffers from a severe lack of source citations; in fact as I write this the Crimson's website seems to be the only one. The major specific facts need to be linked to some source, per the verifiability policy. Crimson and University websites are reasonable, because what is important is that the reader know where the fact came from, and be able to judge the reliability of the source.

Usually, with regard to facts about itself, one would expect an organization to be reasonably accurate but occasionally self-serving, so it tells the reader much more to say "According to the Crimson it is the only daily newspaper in Cambridge, Massachusetts[citation]" than to say flatly "The Crimson is only daily newspaper in Cambridge." If the City of Cambridge has a website that lists businesses, etc. and has one listing newspapers, of course that would be better still, etc. But it is much more important that a fact have some reference from a source whose reliability can be judged, than that the reference be a gold-plated standard of Absolute Revealed Truth.

I tagged the two that I thought were most egregious. Any claim of being a superlative (oldest, etc.) is very likely to be somewhat debatable and involve judgements of what it means to be continuously published, to be a college newspaper, etc. So I'd like to know where this came from and what the details are. I haven't looked into it myself and I could be wrong, but I'll bet a nickel, even money, that there is at least one other college newspaper somewhere that claims to be the oldest.

The second is a quotation, a jocular reference to the Lampoon. Well, it's in quotation marks... so let's have the place, any place, it's quoted from. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Fine, we can link to an article that each one of them wrote, which will be easy unless they were non-content board editors. 140.247.248.102 14:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Presidents list

Copied from User talk:Ajd:

The Crimson is one of the most prestigious college paper's in the world, and the election (the shoot) for the president is a very elaborate process, that of which carries a fair amount of prestige and is very involved. It's also interesting to see the evolved diversity of the position over the past two decades. It's one of the most celebrated leadership positions at Harvard, too. --THC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.103.29.10 (talk) 22:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

These things are true. However, it's not a justification for including a list of all the Crimson presidents of the past 20 years; it's a list of names of people none of whom the typical reader will have heard of, and most of whom are not notable enough for a Wikipedia reader to learn anything more about them—which means that it's a list that conveys basically no information to the reader. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, after all. And if there's something to say about the evolved diversity of the position, it can be said better in prose than in the format of a basically uninterpretable list. AJD (talk) 00:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

It has recently been reported by the AP that The Harvard Crimson Executive Board has resigned after a sophomore trying to get onto the News Board (by a semester-long process known as "comping") filed sexual harrasment charges. Sophomore Cheryl Daley claims that News Board members made jokes asking her to "donkeyfunk them". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.248.145 (talk) 01:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Anybody reading this write for the Crimson?

Wikipedians are having a wild and raucous debate about the merits of the Crimson's freshmen poll -- does anybody know how the question about cheating on homework was phrased, or how many respondents answered it?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:41, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

First, Crimson editors are way too busy losing their virginities [3] to have time to answer such an inquiry;
Second, any answer would be OR;
Third, I've decided that (speaking for myself, anyway) that if you're really set on including the Crimson poll, it's not worth arguing about it any more. [4]
EEng (talk) 10:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Just seeking information; maybe somebody reading this can enlighten us? Better yet: if somebody reading this writes for the Crimson, please consider publishing the poll's methodology.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:50, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Harvard Crimson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:The Harvard Crimson people

Category:The Harvard Crimson people has been nominated for renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Harvard_Crimson/Archive_1&oldid=1149255966"