Template talk:Oregon Newspaper Publishers Association

Papers that are no longer ONPA members
How should this template deal with newspapers that still exist but are no longer members (regular, associate or collegiate) of ONPA? Should they be deleted from the template or, instead, marked as "former" members? The Hillsboro Argus and the Forest Grove Leader, along with the Beaverton Leader, were both listed as associate members until at least September 2015, as shown here (and the Hillsboro Argus was a regular/full member until 2012), but are no longer members, according to ONPA's list. The Beaverton Leader and Hillsboro Argus ceased publication under those names with last week's editions (of Jan. 6, 2016), to be merged as the Washington County Argus, which is already listed as an associate member (even though its first print issue doesn't come out for another three days). I have added the latter to the template, but I've removed the Beaverton Leader, as it was a red link that was unlikely ever to become an article. (It was never given an ISSN, and an argument can be made that it was not really a separate newspaper, as it was distributed primarily as an insert with all Wednesday editions of The Oregonian in the greater Beaverton area.) However, the Hillsboro Argus was an ONPA member for (probably) its entire history, so this template still seems relevant to that article even though the paper is no longer being published under that name. And, the Forest Grove Leader is still being published, but is no longer a member (one wonders whether this is a clue to its future in view of what its publisher has done with the Bvtn. Leader and Hillsb. Argus). Is the fact that the F.G. Leader was an ONPA member from 2012 to 2015 sufficient to keep it in this navbox template? If so, there definitely should be some sort of notation added to indicate that it is a former member, not a current member, as "current member" status would be inferred by WP readers otherwise. SJ Morg (talk) 12:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't have a strong opinion either way. But here are some suggestions:
 * Remove non-current members.
 * Remove short-lived (<5 years?) now non-members.
 * Add another section for former members.
 * Add a year range if a member is not now a current member: Hillsboro Argus (1894–2012)
 * Postfix some symbol for a not-current member: Hillsboro Argus†   The reader can click on that article to find details.
 * —EncMstr (talk) 00:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)