Talk:The Kansas City Star

Kansas City Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about Kansas City, Missouri, and the surrounding metropolitan area 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.Kansas CityWikipedia:WikiProject Kansas CityTemplate:WikiProject Kansas CityKansas City articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Missouri Mid‑importance

	Missouri portal This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Mid‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Untitled[edit]

Anyone aware of the fact that this newspaper is going to fail soon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.129.227.67 (talk) 09:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed[edit]

One half of the original article, removed:

before becoming a reporter in Toronto, Ontario at the Toronto Daily Star where he met Morley Callaghan.

Someone can Google on Toronto Daily Star, and Morley Callaghan and then write a proper entry, which had no business floating around in a stub on a paper in Kansas City. The article should include something about their boxing match. Ortolan88

Don't mess with the KC Star, I was reading the thing for three month when I was there ;-) --Magnus Manske

The entire bit of gobbledegook about this paper being an organ for the Republicans should be removed. The line about the paper only giving four lines when it won the Pulitzer Prize because of something about Republicans makes absolutely no sense. The paper admittedly leans sharply to the left now for what it is worth. Oddly, the original author of the page made no mention of that.137.1.212.12 09:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC) The GOP and Roy Roberts info is straight from the Star's own website history (which is now in cache)Americasroof 23:24, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Whitlock[edit]

why does the Jason Whitlock article redirect to here?

Joe McDuff[edit]

Who is Joe McDuff? I've never heard of him and can't find any info.--JustAGal 20:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joe McDuff was a sports columnist and was on the MacNeil/Lehrer Report (I think). I'm surprised I can't find any reference via Google in its various web, newspaperarchive or print variations. If properly written an article could be written. I'm always annoyed when folks post those red links and then don't follow through. Americasroof 03:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many papers have comics[edit]

Removed list of comics run in the paper, all syndicated, none originated here. Ortolan88 17:40, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When the contract carriers lost their routes[edit]

Does anyone remember in the early 70's when the Star took the contract carriers routes away from them in effect causing many of them to lost their jobs? The Star then became the contractor. Many of the contract carriers had purchased the routes and had loans on them and then lost everything. I'm trying to remember why the Star did this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.23.244.107 (talk) 22:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Miller's Song[edit]

One could say the song is an homage to the paper. That is how I saw it when it was played daily on the car radio on my way to work in Detroit upon arriving in the States "fresh off the boat" (in this case, a 707). The best line is "better job and higher wages.." hgwb (talk) 07:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Liberal newspaper[edit]

The Kansas City Star has often been described as a fairly liberal newspaper operating in an equally conservative State, the state of Missouri. The article should maybe explain the cultural and political issues surrounding the editorial policies of the Star newspaper. ADM (talk) 18:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@ADM: I know this response comes a decade late, but it helps to find what other newspapers/publications say about the paper. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:55, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, Ad Fontes Media considers them to skew left in terms of bias^[1], and Media Bias/Fact Check says they are Left-Center biased^[2].JMM12345 (talk) 04:10, 6 December 2021 (UTC)JMM12345[reply]

References

Apology for a history of racism in the lead[edit]

MJL, IHateAccounts, it's not 100% clear this material is due for the article if use the WP:10YEARS test. Assuming that CNN running the story makes it due for the body that doesn't justify the addition to the lead. That said, the lead is meant to be a summary of the article body. I count roughly 20 paragraphs in the article body (this includes clumping some short ones together thus I'm under counting). The apology section is a single paragraph, about half of which is a quote and contains little new content vs the text from the lead. The lead is two paragraphs, one being the apology paragraph. In terms of text length this is 1/3rd of the lead. The lead is meant to summarize the most significant aspects of the article body. In this case 1/3rd to 1/2 of the lead is used to almost repeat 1/20th of the article body. Per MOS:LEAD, "As in the body of the article itself, the emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources." The single CNN article and the paper's own announcement don't justify inclusion in the lead. MOS:LEADREL provides yet more detail. MJL, I think your edit summary suggests I missed it from the body. I didn't (thought I did miss the broken citation). My edit summary was meant to indicate that I felt it didn't have sufficient weight to include in the lead as well as the body.

Adding recent content to the lead with an assumption it has sufficient weight is a common event on Wikipedia but we really need to ask if the content rises to the level of inclusion in the lead. So often it doesn't even if it is clearly due for the body. The broken citation was a bad on my part. Sorry I missed it. Springee (talk) 04:13, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Springee: The story is covered in the NY Times, Guardian, The Hill, NBC, ABC, CNN, USA Today, Washington Post, The Week, NPR, and a host of local television and news sites as well. As the Star will have a six-part series, I plan to add more after they finish the release, but it is clear this is a core story regarding the identity of the Kansas City Star.

For the moment, I am reducing my viewing considerably to take a break from being hounded, so I will probably not respond to you again any time soon. IHateAccounts (talk) 15:22, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That would justify coverage in the body. It still doesn't justify an addition to the lead. Also, if covered by those other sources it would be best to include one or two more. Currently all other editor can do is judge by the single CNN source. Springee (talk) 15:56, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Springee: To be honest, I only found this page through my monitoring of IHA's edits. I think that the lead should generally be added to here and include the recently added content.
While normally I am sympathetic to WP:RECENTISM concerns, I think these latest comments are really something that will show WP:LASTING impact (though you can chop that up to WP:CRYSTALBALL admittedly). The reason I say that is you have the head of the organisation recasting the role of said organisation for the last 150 years. That is no small thing in my view.
While the lead could be expanded, as well as coverage of this event, there is WP:NODEADLINE. We can just fix those problems later if and when we desire.
–MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:50, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MJL, those are all fine reasons for the content to be in the article. However, I do not see this as lead worthy. The changes in ownership didn't make it to the lead. This article series may or may not be much in the end. Will this article series actually change the way the paper operates? It really is hard to say what the lasting impact will be. We shouldn't take the attitude that we add it to the lead now and remove it later. In the spirit of NODEADLINE we can afford to wait to see if this future article series amounts to anything before adding it to the lead. The coverage of it looks like "me-too" sort of coverage where sources are slapping something together quickly to fill their websites. Still, that coverage makes a good case for article level inclusion. It does not suggest a need to repeat nearly all of the entry (absent the long quote) in the lead. That's just bad writing and something we should discourage. Springee (talk) 18:09, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Springee: I've commentted it out. When I get out of work, I'll do a reorganization for the article to make it less WP:UNDUE for the lead. I think the lead should include more of the article content. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:51, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Printing No Longer From The Glass Print Hall[edit]

As a once Kansas Citian, I'm fairly certain that the printing facilities are no longer being used to print out of. There have been signs outside of it looking to intend to lease the building as office space. If anyone knows more information on the subject please mention it here as we might be able to update the current circumstances. Thank you all! Rep Author (talk) 19:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://adfontesmedia.com/kansas-city-star-bias-and-reliability/

[2] ttps://mediabiasfactcheck.com/kansas-city-star/

[1]

[2]