Talk:The Daily Telegraph
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Daily Telegraph article.
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
Article policies | |
 |
The contents of The Daily Torygraph were merged into The Daily Telegraph and they now redirect here. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
So what do ya' think?[edit]
So yeah, it's probably a bit incomprehensible to non-english people, but hopefully it should be graspable- it's just a right-wing paper... comments, suggestions? Methinks it lacks something at the moment. --Sir Jam 22:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yah...no fucking clue...but then again I'm Canadian...eh? --Sir Zombiebaron 03:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Staunch NIMBYism - take that to its logical extreme. also does a good crossword. no, yuo
chat 12:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Plus it's overly proud of its status as a "reputable" paper. --Sir Jam 12:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- I like it, hell I've already added to it which is usually a good sign that I like something. I'm going to regret this, but I think you need a larger photo of Thatcher. I like continuity in articles, if the other articles are all 200px wide then it looks out of place to put something small in the corner. Plus it can double up as a means to frighten the children. -- Sir Mhaille
(talk to me)
- I like it, hell I've already added to it which is usually a good sign that I like something. I'm going to regret this, but I think you need a larger photo of Thatcher. I like continuity in articles, if the other articles are all 200px wide then it looks out of place to put something small in the corner. Plus it can double up as a means to frighten the children. -- Sir Mhaille
- Plus it's overly proud of its status as a "reputable" paper. --Sir Jam 12:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Done, but on your head be it... --Sir Jam 13:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- That is teh sex. -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me)
- That is teh sex. -- Sir Mhaille
- Done, but on your head be it... --Sir Jam 13:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Anyone else? I have pretty much no more ideas for this now, so I may just have to leave it to rot in obscurity until someone with more imagination comes and makes something of it... --Sir Jam 20:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Dunno. It's okay but not there yet. More stuff, less stuff per section, slight subtlety, um ... - David Gerard 15:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
This is I think the finest thing Ive ever read.