Talk:Daily Mail#rfc A86A099

I think this might be worth a brief mention, if a good secondary source could be found. For those unfamiliar with Brian Bilston, the poem is as follows:

{{Quote box |width=400px |align=left |quoted=true |bgcolor=#FFFFF0 |salign=right

|quote =

"How Much I Dislike the Daily Mail"

:I would rather

:eat Quavers that are six week’s stale,

:blow dry the hair of Gareth Bale,

:listen to the songs of Jimmy Nail,

:than read one page of the Daily Mail.

:If I were bored

:in a waiting room in Perivale,

:on a twelve hour trip on British rail

:or a world circumnavigational sail,

:I would not read the Daily Mail.

:I would happily read

:the complete works of Peter Mayle,

:the autobiography of Dan Quayle,

:selected scripts from Emmerdale,

:but I couldn't ever read the Daily Mail.

:Far better to

:stand outside in a storm of hail,

:be blown out to sea in a powerful gale

:then swallowed by a humpback whale

:than have to read the Daily Mail.

|source=From: You Took the Last Bus Home: The Poems of Brian Bilston (2017)}}

{{-}}

Martinevans123 (talk) 13:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

The newspaper is neither formally affiliated with a recognized Zionist organization nor informally associated with a Zionist movement. It’s difficult to believe that the previous editor’s addition of “Zionism” as a political alignment for the paper was based on anything other than personal opinion. J F-T (talk) 18:04, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:I guess this is a reference to the inclusion of "Zionism" in the infobox, added by AnyDosMilVint on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daily_Mail&diff=prev&oldid=1284064530 5 April 2025]. I agree Zionism does not belong. In an earlier talk page thread [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Daily_Mail/Archive_9#Infobox_-_political_alignment_--_other Infobox - political alignment -- other] I argued political alignment should be empty, but I failed. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:I agree. That’s quite bold to put in an infobox - especially with no citation or evidence. Maybe in the controversy section RJ2677 (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:: Oh, there's no way I'm getting into an edit war over this; in fact I'm surprised it's still there ("discussion needed" addendum notwithstanding). I could present a ton of valid references attesting the DM as a Zionist publication and it'd still be erased eventually, for no reason, so feel free to do so! :-) AnyDosMilVint (talk) 20:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daily_Mail&diff=prev&oldid=1285578613 removed] with edit summary "Undid edit as of 10:05, 5 April 2025 by AnyDosMilVint. See talk page = The Daily Mail isn't aligned with Zionism". Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:27, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/University_of_Nebraska-Lincoln/Advanced_Editing_(Spring) | assignments = Sara.badura, Sarabadura1 | reviewers = Cerberus313 | start_date = 2025-01-21 | end_date = 2025-05-16 }}

— Assignment last updated by Sarabadura1 (talk) 19:57, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Daily Mail|answered=yes}}

I am seeking to edit based off grammar, spelling, and formatting mistakes. Sarabadura1 (talk) 20:48, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

:File:X mark.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. LizardJr8 (talk) 22:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

I still couldn’t see a proof for a right wing position. 2A06:C701:4F2B:3C00:10D0:CAC5:578C:B87A (talk) 23:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

:There are three sources for their position. — Czello ^(music) 07:40, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:This is about the infobox, eh? Alas, in a talk page discussion [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Daily_Mail/Archive_9#Infobox_-_political_alignment_--_other Infobox - political alignment --other] a majority favoured right-wing. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)