Talk:The Idler (1993)

19th-century Idler
This isn't the first magazine called The Idler. There was a British publication by the same title in the 19th century -- see their interview with Louis Wain here. Is the current one meant to be in some way a resurrection of the previous one? Should the two be on one page or should they be disambiguated? Perodicticus 00:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Some more info: According to this site, the 19th century Idler was started by Jerome K. Jerome and was published from 1892-1911. Also, Samuel Johnson produced a publication called The Idler from 1758 to 1760. Perodicticus 00:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Page move
Based on the above, I've decided to move this page to The Idler (1993) and create a disambiguation page at The Idler. I don't think this should be controversial, but if it causes any problems please let me know. Perodicticus 00:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Tidied up
Hope no one minds but I've tidied and sorted the article. I know nothing about the subject at all so if I've made an error please correct it. Thanks. Super Ted 11:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * They should do one called "Crap Insurance" too.

Fair use rationale for Image:Idler.jpg
Image:Idler.jpg 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 Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Categories
Please retain this article in the following categories; Criticism and refusal of work, Labour journals, Utopian movements. It fits well in all of them and is not just "a magazine for those with money".--Darrelljon (talk) 20:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Nice statement. Unfortunately you'll need to explain how it is a labour magazine and how it is a magazine about refusal of work - things cant just be accepted at face value. I note that the contributors are clearly not "labour" but white-collar, bourgeoisie - so quite the contrary of labour according to Marx. And where does the refusal to work fit in? As satire - maybe? As a good number of the contributors have led very active and financially rewarding working lives. Everton Fish - Hydrofoil XI (talk) 12:10, 23 May 2010 (UTC)