Talk:New York (magazine)/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Introduction

"New York Magazine was once renowned for its Competitions, which ran until 2000 under the editorship of Mary Ann Madden, who guaranteed an ambuscade of coruscating wit and hilarity. (Example: Geronimo's epitaph - "Requiscat in Apache".) An average of fifteen hundred entries were received each week and winners included such illustrious names as David Mamet, Herb Sargent, Dan Greenburg to name but a few. David Halberstam is on record as admitting that he submitted entries 137 times and never won. Stephen Sondheim, Woody Allen and Nora Ephron were fans. Its demise was greatly lamented. In August 2000, the magazine published a letter from an Irish contestant, John O'Byrne, who wrote: "How I'll miss the fractured definitions, awful puns, conversation stoppers, one-letter misprints, ludicrous proverbs, openings of bad novels, near misses, et al (what a nice guy Al is!)". Many entrants have since migrated to The Washington Post's The Style Invitational."

I've never opened the magazine before, so I am confused. This is unpresentable as an introductory source.

lots of issues | leave me a message 15:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Why a Rewrite

This article as I found it had a lot of the hallmarks of a copyvio - including 1) basically all being put up in one sitting, and 2) a writing style that was just too catchy for an encyclopedia. I can't find the source though, so I am recommending a rewrite, piece by piece. I made the first attempt. Others are welcome to join. Hope this answers some questions. Bruxism 07:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

One thing to consider, though: New York magazine has many ardent fans in journalism--and not a few current and former employees--who might have taken the time to craft this entry.

Good point, Anonymous. But their writing is so good that one would think they would know the difference between what is appropriate for an encyclopedia and what is appropriately glib prose for a fast-moving magazine. Bruxism 01:33, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

For the record, I wrote the bulk of this entry, and it's not a cut-and-paste job. I'm a magazine journalist, as the anonymous poster above guessed, and I write that way. I've since gone through and tried to make it more straightforward. May we remove the flag calling for a rewrite? 65.244.21.133 20:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I stand corrected. You're probably a more successful writer than I, even. I apologize for my criticism, then, but I hope you would be mindful of what's appropriate encyclopedia style. Go ahead and remove the flag, then, but please sign up and get a user account, too. Peace. Bruxism 02:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

No offense taken. You're right to be on the lookout. And I'll sign up as soon as I have a moment, I promise.65.244.21.133 19:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Cue Magazine Removal?

Does anyone have a date and citation for the removal of the Cue Listings section? Since the incorporation is noted, the demise deserves to be as well. —FlashSheridan (talk) 14:11, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

The history part is confusing

New York began life in 1968 as the Sunday-magazine supplement of the New York Herald Tribune newspaper. Edited first by Sheldon Zalaznick and then by Clay Felker, the magazine showcased the work of several talented Tribune contributors, including Tom Wolfe, Barbara Goldsmith, and Jimmy Breslin.[6] Soon after the Tribune went out of business in 1966–67,

Um, it says that it began as a part of the newspaper in 1968, but also says this newspaper went out of business in 1967, so that doesn't make sense. Can anyone supply a better timeline? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimindc (talk • contribs) 04:05, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on New York (magazine). 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.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 11:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas article

I doubt that it is worth mentioning the 'Is Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas' Love for Real?' article. It's one article, out of many published by the magazine. It was quickly forgotten: most of the coverage I see was within 1 to 2 days of the article being published. I just don't see this as something that passes the test of time. feminist (talk) 03:48, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Seems inconsequential. -- Pemilligan (talk) 16:17, 9 May 2019 (UTC)