Talk:The Georgia Straight

Trash
This "paper" is the worst piece of trash to have ever come out of a printing press. ThVa (talk) 04:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Come on "ThVa" - if you are going to fling insults around at least have the decency to say who you are! I notice "you" don't even have a "User page". Are you afraid to put your name to what you say? As far as I am concerned, the Georgia Strait has been one of the most important and honest sources of real news in Canada since the 1960s. I always look forward to seeing the latest issues whenever I visit Vancouver and, although it is now largely ads - the editors still insist on having several really insightful articles each issue. In my opinion it contains the best investigative journalism in B.C., if not Canada. John Hill (talk) 07:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Exploding Boy revert
It's disappointing to see someone's 300 words reverted by a couple of mouse clicks in an "under the radar" minor edit. I thought that's what or  were for.

I restored the text, not because it was great, but because it was relevant, and I used it as the starting point for my expansion. Bookandcoffee 23:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Undermining the pun
There was confusion in the "History" about the pun of the name of the paper. One person didn't know the difference between strait and straight. At the end, the better logic prevailed. However, it still wasn't right. The maps at the time called the water "Georgia Strait", so the pun was better. I heard the government even changed the name to the Strait of Georgia to spoil the pun and thus defeat their hippie detractors! Absurd, eh? Korky Day 09:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I had always assumed that (apart from being a pun) the "straight" in the newspaper's name referred to "straight talking" rather than "straight" as in "not hip". I could be wrong, but are we sure the explanation in the article is accurate? I note it doesn't cite a reference so it could just be someone else's assumption! Barnabypage (talk) 22:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * These discussions about the paper's name have been going on since soon after the paper appeared (and probably before) and have contributed to the on-going mystique of the Straight. If anybody is "serious" about trying to figure out the "true story" why not contact Dan McLeod, the founder and still owner-editor who lives and works in Vancouver? Yours, John Hill (talk) 10:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It would constitute banned original research, of course. :) But I might do it out of interest - I'll let you know if I find anything out. Barnabypage (talk) 12:41, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's true. I was there - but I'm not a reliable source. Santamoly (talk) 03:13, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Online presence/version?
There's no chronicling under History of the online presence of the Straight... I think it's important to mention, because it has some fundamental differences between the print version... not all online articles are in the printed version are they? At least the reader comments under the articles aren't and that's a huge contribution to the experience of reading the articles... Unfortunately, I don't have the time to research the facts about it's online presence; I'm just putting this out there in case someone already knows and can fill it in. -Pietro 24.84.229.90 (talk) 03:01, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

RE: recent edit by Hobbes Goodyear
To: Hobbes Goodyear. I don't agree with your reasoning for 'removed unnecessary and possibly non-WP:NPOV sentence from the lead'. I have simply added to the discussion about the circulation data of the Georgia Straight because I think it's important to know that they haven't published updated info. I think my addition is neutral in its point of view and not unnecessary information. I think that sentence should be put back. Editwiki12 (talk) 05:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * According to the paper's "About" page on its website, "The Georgia Straight is audited by Verified Audit Circulation (VAC)." And Verified Audit Circulation's web page for the paper provides figures through June of last year. Yet your sentence makes it seems as though they are hiding something, which appears to be not merely unnecessary, but wrong. Given the rest of your edit and your edit summary ("the Straight publishes extreme partisan political "journalism" online"), I also think that it is fair to raise the possibility that the excised sentence was non-neutral. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 08:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The VAC link that you give shows only the press run circulation stats. The combined figure including the website circulation is available only to a privileged group and not to the general public. Your reply is misleading in stating that VAC’s webpage ‘provides figures through June of last year’. As I mentioned earlier, I was just adding to the existing wiki discussion about the circulation of the Georgia Straight and the quoted 804,000 number and I think it’s important and necessary information to clarify that the Georgia Straight hasn’t provided an updated average weekly readership figure on their website. This is a FACT and it’s indeed suspect and that’s why it’s important to mention. It’s up to the individual wiki reader to draw their own conclusion as to why the Georgia Straight website which prides itself on the latest news has dated circulation data. Furthermore that About page that you’ve linked is dated April 10, 2008 yet has clearly been subsequently edited because it indicates that it has ‘804,000 readers’ according to ‘2009 Angus Reid’. More recently it’s been updated with ‘Entire contents copyright © 2011 Vancouver Free Press Publishing Corp.’(I’ve printed the page in case it suddenly changes). I challenge you to find the 2011 average weekly readership figure that can be referenced and if you’re able to do so, then add it to this wiki article. Until that’s done or the Straight updates their website with the most current data, I think my sentence should be put back and I don’t agree with your justification for removing it. Shall we take this editing dispute to the Dispute Resolution noticeboard? Editwiki12 (talk) 15:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I was waiting for your reply Hobbes Goodyear. That was a CHEAP move by jumping in and editing the article on your own instead of working it out on this talk page. You wouldn't happen to work for the Georgia Straight would you? Editwiki12 (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * No, I have no connection to them; I have never even been to Canada. I imagine this article is on my watch list because they publish music reviews (my main editing interests being music, AfD discussions, and anti-vandalism.) Given your concerns, I've added current Alexa figures for their website, which seem reasonably in line with the stated printed distribution. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:23, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I think that there should be more coverage on the impact that the Georgia Straight has had on issues of gentrification and the Vancouver housing crisis. I also think that there should be a pro as well as con section of the paper, instead of claiming it to be a predominately left wing source of news. Hoffbell (talk) 03:53, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:22, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Georgia Straight box1.jpg