Talk:Mass media in Poland/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Mass media in Poland. 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 |
unPOVing
What in this article needs unPOVing? I don't get it.Halibutt 14:00, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
There's no need to write about Rywin in the article like this. Besides, it's too short.
This article needs to be update!! Follow by white rabbit 19:25, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Angora left-wing?
Janusz Korwin-Mikke writes there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.205.15.137 (talk) 09:58, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
history
The article lacks mentioning history of media in Poland and this history is very proud, because Poland is a pioneer in freedom of press.--105.158.46.10 (talk) 20:35, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Media of Poland. 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.
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) 05:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Biased
This entire entry consistently breaks the NPOV rules all the way through and most of it relies on a single source that can hardly be considered unbiased itself (the Freedom House report). And it simply reads like a newspaper piece with its style of choice being "X did Y" or "A is highly B" instead of "X was accused of doing Y by such and such" or "A is considered to be highly B by such and such" that would invite a reader to do further research on their own. Not to mention the plethora of grammar and spelling mistakes that expose the writers for the non-native speakers of English that they are.--Jaro7788 (talk) 05:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)