Talk:G. K.'s Weekly

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia

Low

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

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mackay Radio
Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

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

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the G. K.'s Weekly 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

Four publications; I'm redirecting them all here for the moment. G.K.'s lasted longer than the others, arguably (I'm not quite sure whether The New Witness made it past 1923). Charles Matthews 12:17, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial quality

Good material in this article -- but it is appallingly written. Very hard to follow line by line if you analyse it closely. If I had time, I'd pitch in, but I think a Quality notice should be slapped on this for the time being. It needs clarifying and careful rewriting. In addiiton, this is not all about G.K.'s Weekly. The material needs either to be split up or rewritten. June 23 06.

Chesterton as editor...

"Right at the end of his life G. K.'s Weekly in editorial comment on the invasion of Abyssinia seemed to go further..." Further? Further towards what? It's unclear. --66.107.93.194 20:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Private Eye / Distributionism

The final paragrah reads:

"Private Eye, the British satirical and investigative magazine that is in a sense a remote descendant of the publications discussed above, has similarly been called anti-Semitic. Though Private Eye has pursued figures such as Robert Maxwell and James Goldsmith, that is a charge more easily deflected in the absence of any equivalent of distributism, the economic theory proposed by Belloc and the Chestertons."

Can anyone justify (1) the connection between Eye and GKW and (2) the link between distributianism and anti senitism. If not I shall remove the [entire section as it makes no sense to me.

--John Price 09:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted seemingly irrelevant sentence...

Have deleted the following as it seems to bear no relevance on either the article subject itself or the context in which Orwell is mentioned:

Fifteen years later A. K. Chesterton would attack Orwell in the pages of The Weekly Review, over a hostile review in The Observer of a 1943 book Lest We Regret by Douglas Reed, and Orwell hit back in the pages of Tribune.

If anyone can see any reason for it belonging in the article, please paste it back. --Technopat (talk) 21:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on G. K.'s Weekly. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 14:44, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The anti-semitism section needs to be strongly modified.

It reads like a screed, and it's well outside WP:NPOV and clearly contains WP:OR. Reminder to myself to do so. — FPTI (talk) 11:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]