Talk:Politika

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Politika article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Serbia: Belgrade High‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia 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.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Belgrade task force (marked as High-importance).

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

Being the oldest and most respectable[edit]

Being founded in 1904 it is certainly not the oldest of the region (I can name several Romanian newspapers older, like Romania Libera (1876 IIRC)) and "most respectable" is POV. Bogdan | Talk 09:26, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There were newspapers founded before 1904 (in Serbia as well), but they either don't exist any more, or don't have the continuity. Politika is actually considered to be the oldest daily newspaper in the region and third oldest in Europe. -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 12:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disregard my previous post... I've obviously got the wrong information :( -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 00:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Politika.gif[edit]

Image:Politika.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cyrilic[edit]

should it be mentioned that the Politika is the one of the rare contemporaneous newspapers in Serbia that is(almost) completely printed in cyrilic script? just a question. --PrimEviL 16:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milosevic period[edit]

This paragraph is ridiculously poorly worded with such extremely definitive and bombastic statements referenced and supported solely by a single academic journal text. For one, the paragraph should mention who is making these accusations about Politika being "propaganda mouthpiece" and not just take what's written in the journal verbatim as 100% gospel. In addition to being very broadly and poorly referenced the tone of it is extremely accusatory in a completely inappropriate way. It's based on a personal POV preconceived notion of Serb media being some kind of evil hydra beast without any nuances and layers whatsoever, solely devoted to eradicating Albanians, Croats, Muslims or anyone else for that matter. You can not start a paragraph with the following: "the Serbian media during Milošević's era was known to espouse Serb nationalism while promoting xenophobia toward the other ethnicities in Yugoslavia" as some kind of established fact without any support or reference. And even if you do produce reference, the sentence needs to read "according to the view of so and so or such and such, Serbian media during Milosevic years was.....". This entire paragraph requires major revamping.Zvonko (talk) 17:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I'm having a hard time trying to understand just what Politika itself is being accused of... censoring or being biased? By an organization I have never even heard of. In one instance it claims Politika itself is demanding the partition of Croatia, as quoted: - Politika began to openly promote partitioning the territory of SR Croatia -

Sorry, but I find this extremely farfetched. There is a huge difference in a newspaper reporting, publishing the opinion piece of the authors/editors etc and in plotting the demise of a country. Even if it were true, how can an organization that centers itself on the goal of fighting censorship move to censor a possibly even probably biased media outlet simply because they don't like it? Is that not the definition of censorship? Next the ICAC bashes the paper for quoting (I will assume interviewing) a member of a political party with questionable views. Um forgive my ignorance but I remember that newspapers often interview people with a wide array of beliefs and then print the story, that was sort of their job. And lastly, the ICAC damns the paper for bringing up historical facts because someone might get their feelings hurt... at this point I question the neutrality of this organization. At the end of the day I honestly hope that the contributor Mladifilozof will realize that there is no such thing as a completely unbiased media and that although 'propaganda' might not appear as obvious as it once used to, it is assuredly still there, even in the most democratic of democracies, and is simply a fact of life. Buttons (talk) 06:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree also. --WhiteWriter ^speaks 11:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The topic of this discussion was removed en masse in January 2011.

I later added a new summary of the problem in April 2012.

--Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Sources cannot be find for the period in question. --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 12:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Politika. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Politika. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:28, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]