Talk:Radar Online

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Puffery[edit]

These edits by an anon introduced some useful new information but did so in a generally unencylopedic tone -- more like a press release. I suspect WP:COI edits. (As of this writing the anon account has done nothing except edit this article.) The article needs cleanup. JamesMLane t c 02:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Status as a publication[edit]

There is still a www.radar.com website, but is it a blog, or what? And how reliable is it as a news source, or specifically as a source of university ratings? --Uncle Ed (talk) 04:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows? This article has www.radaronline.com as the old website for the magazine. Whatever is there now is something different from the second iteration of the magazine, which shut down in 2008 and sold its websites to American Media (publisher), publisher of the National Enquirer, Star, and other tabloids. GRBerry 02:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There should obviously be a separate Wiki article for RadarOnline, as it is now a major website in its own right (so much so that the National Enquirer's editor-in-chief stepped down to focus solely on Radar Online). [1]

Observe its recent spike in web traffic rankings. [2]

Not a magazine[edit]

It's a celebrity gossip website that incidentally has some news, but virtually everything in it is anonymous "insider sources" and these types of cite regularly pay people to speak with them. That immediately takes it out of the realm of journalism — because if you're paying somebody to say something to you anonymously, people will say anything and just make up plausible-sounding stuff that would be hard to disprove.

Bottom line: No responsible, accredited journalistic body would ever call this a magazine. It's a gossip website, no different from PerezHilton.com except with a larger staff. I believe that because of these reasons, the magazine-project template is inappropriate. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Radar Online. Favonian (talk) 22:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RadarOnline.com → Radar Online — Recently moved from RadarOnline as "uncontroversial". However, I'd challenge that; every instance cited where ".com" is used as in an article's title (Amazon.com, TMZ.com, Salon.com) is one where disambiguation is required. Not the case here. Also note that most pages in Category:American online magazines do not have the .com URL suffix included. Rather than requesting restoring it to its original location, I'm suggesting moving it to a title with a space between the two words; that's how most third-party sources seem to refer to it. DeLarge (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: per WP:TITLECHANGES, restoring it to RadarOnline would also be acceptable. --DeLarge (talk) 03:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support restoring previous title "RadarOnline": The site itself is "RadarOnline.com" in its logo, and "Radaronline" in its copyright indicia, so even the site itself doesn't called itself Radar Online in those two important ways (trademark and copyright). While some newspapers including Newsday do use "RadarOnline.com" when referring to it, I understand the arguments made here and elsewhere re: ".com" suffixes and WP:COMMON. However, the company itself does not spell it as two words, so I would support restoring it to "RadarOnline" or, if necessary, as in its copyright indicia, "Radaronline". Post updated Tenebrae (talk) 23:17, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I just googled their name and the first results from their own website are 'Radar Online' with a space and no .com. So that must be how their own meta tags describe the page. Hairy-backed Mary (talk)

Just a clarification, hopefully neutral: The purpose of metatags is solely search engine optimization. The only things that are official, by definition, are the federally trademarked logo and the copyrighted name. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Discussion[edit]

Comment regarding legal stuff. Near the bottom of radaronline.com are the following two lines:

Radaronline is a member of BUZZMEDIA Entertainment, a division of BUZZMEDIA

Per HBM's comment above, they also use the <title>Radar Online</title> in their source code, so that is how they want it to display in the browser tabs. --DeLarge (talk) 03:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That does look so, and I swear I read "copyright Radaronline" on the site just days ago. The Terms of Use page adds even more confusion: "TERMS OF USE (Effective March 1, 2009) INTRODUCTION AND ACCEPTANCE Welcome to www.RadarOnline.com, an interactive online news service operated by RadarOnline, LLC."

It looks like you can call it anything you want, but just don't call it late for dinner ... as the old joke goes.

So in conjunction with this and discussions at Talk:Comic Book Resources and Talk:Comics Bulletin, I certainly respect the clear consensus. If Radar Online is among the things it calls itself, I'm on board with that. I'm glad this discussion got an airing and I'm especially glad that editors were civil, for the most part, across these three conversations. I'm especially appreciative of DeLarge taking point on this and setting an amicable and constructive tone. Onward! --Tenebrae (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mel Gibson[edit]

What happened to the information about the Mel Gibson tapes exclusive? That was their biggest scoop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hairy-backed Mary (talk • contribs) 07:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Italicize Name?[edit]

Radar Online is a publication name, so should it be italicized?--Supergamer345 (talk) 15:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]