Talk:The Telegraph (India)

Way too many Telegraphs

There are way too many newspapers called The Telegraph. If no one objects, I'm going to create a disambiguation page within a few days. Illinois2011 | Talk 23:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

YES YOU SHOULD DO IT —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soni master (talk • contribs) 14:58, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

IMP

The logo of The Telegraph (Kolkata) is the official logo of The Telegraph (Kolkata) and it has been taken from its official website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.3.234 (talk) 15:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Title change

Raised this at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics first. I was using The Telegraph as a source and checked this page, and was confused at first as to whether I had the right article. If you look at the newspapers masthead, it clearly reads Calcutta, not Kolkata, so the article should clearly reflect that in its title. Dougweller (talk) 16:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 7 November 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Based on my reading of this discussion below, it is hard to say that any title has gained consensus here. Generally, it seems that most people agree that '(Calcutta)' is an acceptable disambiguator, because the newspaper itself uses it, because that is where the newspaper is based, and because it is commonly known by variant names that include 'Calcutta'. That isn't to say that there are no valid reasons for a potential move to '(India)', but no one was able to make convincing case on this point, and I don't think anyone has supported the proposer's move rationale. The question of whether 'Calcutta' should be changed to the modern 'Kolkata' has not be adequately addressed in the discussion, and there is no clear consensus on that matter either. I would suggest that this is a separate matter from the original proposal. If an editor has a compelling argument for changing the disambiguator to 'Kolkata', and I do believe that such an argument exists, then he ought make a new requested move proposal. (non-admin closure) RGloucester — ☎ 17:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

---

The Telegraph (Calcutta) → The Telegraph (India) – Because The Telegraph has branches not just in Calcutta, but even outside like Jharkhand, Patna and Bhubaneshwar. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:29, 7 November 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 15:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose: When multiple newspapers have the same name it is usual practice to disambiguate them using the name of the city they are principally based in, for example internationally the The Times is known as The Times of London although some parts of its content are not produced in London but other parts of the United Kingdom. Unless the nominator can provide evidence that the newspaper is widely known using the disambiguator India then the title should remain as it is at present. Ebonelm (talk) 23:04, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support: Looking at the The Times (disambiguation), the general convention seems to be adding the country's name, like in the case of The Times (South Africa). For countries where multiple newspapers of the same name are published, city name is used. Pratyush (talk) 11:16, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose: Their own website says "The Telegraph, calcutta, india". Its more like part of their name than their printing locations. Previously the article had been boldly moved to The Telegraph (Kolkata) as Calcutta changed to Kolkata but was reverted back by @Doug Weller: for same reason. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:30, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Move to The Telegraph (Kolkata). The city is probably a better, more WP:PRECISE disambiguator, as that's where the paper is based (lots of papers have regional editions). However, the disambiguator ought to match the spelling of the topic article barring a good reason not to, and the city's article is at Kolkata.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Good reason already given in my above comment; that they themselves uses Calcutta it being more like part of their name now than their geolocation. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:07, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't find that convincing. If "Calcutta" was part of their name, the article would be at The Telegraph of Calcutta or Calcutta Telegraph or something, rather than The Telegraph (disambiguator). The disambiguator ought to match the article.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:49, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Why isnt their header convincing enough? Why does any other logic have to applied here? They had an option of changing to Kolkata but they didn't. Why then should you decide to call it such? Besides that, the current title is sufficiently disambiguated. If its to be changed to India or Kolkatta or Kolkatta, India or anything, one would have to put in as in why those names are more common names over the current one. Not seeing that being done here yet. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 18:42, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

The actual name of the paper is The Telegraph. The Telegraph isn't available due to other uses of this term, so we have to disambiguate. The standard way of doing that is by adding the city the paper is based in; in this case, that city's article is located at Kolkata. Whether the paper itself uses the old spelling when referring to the city isn't particularly relevant, in my opinion. Now, if the name "Calcutta" was actually part of the title, I'd agree with you, but that's not the case.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Your opinion is not more important than that of the paper's or WP:COMMONNAME? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

The WP:COMMONNAME of the city in Indian English is Kolkata; if it's not, then its article should move.--Cúchullain ^t/c 04:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

We are to deal with the commonname of the subject entity, not of the city with which you are trying to link it to. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

You're going in circles. The common name of the paper is "The Telegraph", which isn't available. The disambiguator just exists to distinguish from other articles by naming the paper's city, which is Kolkata.--Cúchullain ^t/c 04:33, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

You are mistaking. The name is The Telegraph, the commonname is The Telegraph (Calcutta), the name they prefer themselves on the header is The Telegraph (Calcutta) and has had no effect of official name change of the city since 2001. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:41, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I doubt many sources call it "The Telegraph (Calcutta)". It's a Wikipedia convention.--Cúchullain ^t/c 04:44, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I see more Google book results for Calcutta over Kolkata or India even if it is our convention. They do not specifically use parenthesis but are also using comma. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:55, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose In this case I support titling the WP page just as the newspaper does on the newspaper itself, on their website, their Facebook page, etc. I suspect it's their legal name, with the "Calcutta" spelling. First Light (talk) 05:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support The Telegraph (India). It's the only notable newspaper named "The Telegraph" in India (per The Telegraph (disambiguation)), it solves the nominator's issue of having a presence in more Indian cities than just Kolkata, and we wouldn't have to worry about the Kolkata/Calcutta distinction with this qualifier. All in all, using "(India)" is vastly superior. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose You guys are making a mistake here. "Calcutta" here, is not a reference to a branch, it's the factually correct name. Their own website reads, "The Telegraph - Calcutta", it's also referred to as "Calcutta Telegraph" by aggregators. The newspaper publishes everyday with a header that says "The Telegraph.... calcutta, india". Per WP:COMMONNAME, WP:VERIFIABILITY, status quo stands. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 16:27, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose After a look at the website and other references, "The Telegraph (Calcutta)" seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME. In particular, "Calcutta" is part of the newspaper's name. We do not rename it simply because the city's name has changed. I am still finding contemporary references to Calcutta, so I suggest it stay where it is. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 15 May 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:54, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

---

The Telegraph (Calcutta) → The Telegraph (Kolkata) – Propose to move, for reasons of consistency, to a namespace reflecting the modern (or original), post-colonial name for the city, whose article occupies the namespace Kolkata.  Ohc ^¡digame! 07:26, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

• Comment Would make sense to move it to the current placename. I'd also support a move to The Telegraph (India), unless there are other Indian places that have The Telegraph newspaper AND an article on WP. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
• Support. The article on the city is located at Kolkata so that's what the disambiguation ought to be. I don't necessarily object to (India), but many papers have region editions. Here, the city seems to be the best bet.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Political stance

@Tayi Arajakate: what "cherrypicking" was done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuyutsu Ho (talk • contribs) 15:36, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

You need to sign your messages for a ping to register. Regarding the addition, it was almost entirely composed of cherrypicked material.

For instance the portion cited to Barclay et al., was more or less a copy-paste of chosen parts from the abstract. Not only was that a copyright violation, the addition misrepresented the source itself. According to the study, there was no incumbency advantage and that in general there was unfavorable coverage for the Congress. The Telegraph (alongside The Hindu) were more supportive compared to the general trend. Your addition cherrypicked a sentence from it and stated that The Telegraph was more supportive of the Congress.

There is similar cherrypicking with respect to the Newslaundry article, where you picked out the catchy phrase, "the derision decreased and caution increased" and left out everything else from the article, instead of summarising it. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 13:19, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Editorial stance

In 2022, an analysis of media bias found that The Telegraph which is commonly considered to be leftist, did exhibit an anti alignment towards both BJP and Congress which do not follow the leftist ideology, and was most aligned to the frames pro-poor, the pro-informal sector, and the pro-middle class.

References