Wikipedia:Newspapers.com/Experiences

This page is for capturing experiences with Newspapers.com. Make sure to share any ideas, comments or experiences that you have to help expand the quality of this impact for you: Simply add a new section!

• Just got my account and I've noticed that many articles are labelled "Premium" and require an additional subscription. I think this should be pointed out in the introduction text of this page. OscarL 14:55, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi @Oscar: The accounts were just upgraded to Premium. See if you can access it now!Sadads (talk) 16:47, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Same in my case, I couldn't access most of the newspaper clippings/articles on the site as I'm on a free account as well. Blake Gripling (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Blakegripling ph: You will be in the next batch of users we send off for activation of accounts. We review entries in the Google Form, and then give them, in batches, to Newspapers.com for full activation. You will definitely have access by the end of the week, Sadads (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just registered as well and cannot access Premium content. I will wait too. Thanks,Jacqke (talk) 06:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have anything in depth to say yet other than that clippings are such an excellent idea and so useful for citations on Wikipedia. Having to place a subscription required template after sources irks me, so being able to share the exact source is great. Sam Walton (talk) 18:05, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I second that opinion. Great idea for verification. • Astynax ^talk 20:17, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed,the clippings feature is excellent. I also love how I'm able to search within my own clippings... this will be enormously helpful when I get down to some serious copywriting and referencing.Danimations (talk) 02:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Out of curiosity, is there functionality to "consolidate" multiple clippings? For example, let's say I'm referencing an article that starts on page 1 and is continued on page 6. Is there a way to make a clipping of the page 1 part, a clipping of the page 6 part, and then merge them into one?

Another scenario I've just encountered is the leading headline of an edition. I'm trying to clip an article but the headline (the title) stretches across the whole page. I'd have to clip pretty much the whole front page to get the title of the article into the clipping.

Just some initial thoughts. This clipping functionality on the whole is pretty cool, though the "edit" interface after the fact is a bit clunky. Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû _(blah?) 02:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great feedback @Mukkakukaku: I will forward this to our POC at Newspapers.com, Sadads (talk) 14:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this suggestions @Mukkakukaku:. We've talked about multi-page clipping, but haven't done much with it because the vast majority of our users are pulling things like obituary or marriage records which are generally on one page. We'll bring it up again and see if there is a way we could support that without it getting too complex. I've noticed the same thing with the full width headlines. Is clipping the full page width a problem for what you are trying to do? If so, what would be a better solution for you? Are you finding the clipping editing clunky in the viewer, on the clipping page, in the clipping list or just everywhere? What could we do to make it easier for you. Thanks again for your feedback and please let me know when you notice other things. Drinknews (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just add that there doesn't seem to be an option to delete a clipping. If I clip an article and subsequently find a better/more relevant article, I cannot delete the first clipping that I will not end up using in any article or sharing. On the one hand, I think it is a good thing not to be able to delete a clipping that has been cited in an article, but having a clutter of more than a few saved, but unused, clippings begins to confuse the old brain cells. • Astynax ^talk 18:44, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Drinknews: -- really the full width headline issue is more of an annoyance than a real "problem." Consider the following scenario. Let's say there's a headline that stretches the entire width of the front page. Then the article itself is a column or two that stretches the entire height of the front page. If I just clip the article text, then I have a narrow, two-column strip that is the entire height of the newssheet. But if I clip the headline as well, I have effectively just clipped the entire front page, when all I really care about is the two columns related to the headline.

It's really less of a problem than it could be, because the clipping page gives you a previous of the article itself. Here is an example: article. Here, I clipped just the article column and the fraction of the headline that's in that same vertical space. But in the preview on the right, you can see the full headline. If I had clipped the full width of the headline, the major story that would dominate the clipping would be the one of Frank Sinatra, Jr.r's kidnapping which, while interesting, really has nothing to do with the event that I'm researching. It really has more to do with how the newspaper chose to lay out its articles, with the text for the major headline relegated to the very edge of the sheet.

I also think that user @Astynax: brings up a good point about deleting clippings. I've found that often many newspapers will carry the same basic story, courtesy of a news agency/wire service like the Associated Press, but some will have more "complete" information or will have their staff writers add more information themselves. If I originally clip an article, and then find a more complete article in this scenario, I would probably like to remove the original clipping and replace it with the new one.

Of course, if someone has already linked to this original clipping, that would be a problem; but maybe a "grace period" of an hour or so before the clipping gets "locked in"? --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû _(blah?) 16:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...or perhaps an option to overwrite an existing clipping with a new image/clipping of the better article to avoid any existing link(s) going dead. Wire service stories with varying amounts of information is exactly the scenario that concerned me (I also have an image that I clipped a second and better-cropped version before I figured out how to get to the edit screen (now I have 2, one of which I'll likely never use). • Astynax ^talk 01:00, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mukkakukaku:@Astynax: (Is there a better way to ping two people at once?) You should be able to delete a clipping you have made by clicking on "Edit" and then clicking on the trash can in the lower left of the overlay. If it's someone else's clipping you won't have the "Edit" option. @Mukkakukaku: It is tricky with those long headlines. Hopefully that preview helps like you mentioned.--Drinknews (talk) 16:55, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get a trash can on the popup window. There are no visible buttons other than Cancel and Save. Under the current IE11, there is a blank space in the lower-left corner. On clicking around the blank space, there are apparently 2 invisible controls (one on the left that toggles the Public and Notify Me options; one on the right that asks if you want to delete). Now I just have to remember where they are hiding. Thanks for the clue. • Astynax ^talk 02:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Astynax: Interesting. We played around with it here a little in IE11. It seems to work OK for us in the HTML (new) viewer and from outside the viewer on the clipping list page or the page for an individual clipping, but there is something wrong in the Flash (old) viewer. Do you know which viewer you are using? We've had some folks tell us they had trouble getting to/staying in the new viewer. Here's a link that has helped reset some of those folks, http://www.newspapers.com/?site=standard. Please let me know if that doesn't help. Thanks very much for the feedback. --Drinknews (talk) 15:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Drinknews:I was using the new viewer, which came up by default. If I switch over to the old viewer, the Delete button is then visible in the edit dialog. Flash on this system is current (Win 8; player version 14.0.0.176). • Astynax ^talk 17:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Astynax:That's odd and I'm not sure I'm entirely clear about just what's happening? Would you mind sending me a screenshot? --Drinknews (talk) 21:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Drinknews:Certainly. I don't know how to attach or post an image here, but if you email me from my account, that will give me your email to respond directly with a screen grab that shows the missing icon/button on the Edit dialog. • Astynax ^talk 22:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now I'm starting to get concerned. If this is going to involve a lot of complicated directions, I don't know if I can do it. I do run into the problem with real newspaper articles of the article starting on one page and fiinishing on another, but I assume the first page is all that Wikipedia needs. I haven't tried to use this yet.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:17, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In almost all cases, you need only link to a clipping of the article from the single page that contains the information most relevant to the statement being cited. If there is vital information on another page in the same newspaper, you can always make another clipping and cite that separately. • Astynax ^talk 17:43, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't tried to do any of this yet and if gets too complicated I don't know if I can use this. I haven't looked to see how any of this works yet.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've found it very easy thus far, don't worry! Sam Walton (talk) 21:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to everyone involved in getting access to this; this is going to be a great resource. I have a question about cite news: is the title field for clippings intended to be the title that we save the clipping with, or the title of the piece in the original newspaper? I have been using the title of the piece in the newspaper, because one day the clippings might disappear (e.g. if newspapers.com goes out of business) but the underlying source will still be there, and it seems best to use that. However, the example cite given doesn't seem to do either; the title of the actual piece in the paper is "Obituary notes" and the "title" field is "Charles Wingate obituary". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Mike Christie: I took the citation from an article that was already using the clippings function. The "title" field is for the title used within the newspaper. I have updated that citation to better reflect the actual title within that field. We want the Cite News metadata to reflect the larger metadata standards for Newspaper citations so that tools like the OCLC Fulltext can recognize the fields and project them into their own search engines. Sadads (talk) 14:04, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be helpful for us to keep notes on what use we've made of the subscription? Or is there some automated way that this can be tracked? I ask because if in a year, at renewal, it's going to be relevant to ask how much we've used the resource, I'd like to know now so I can keep notes. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Mike Christie:: as I understand it Newspapers.com uses the unique url that you create your accounts with to indicate that you are a "cohort" of users from a particular group. Also, because they have to manually change your account information, I think they have been adding strays to that group as well. From our end, we track url additions via Special:LinkSearch and are in the process of helping develop a V.2 of Linkypedia (http://linkypedia.inkdroid.org/) that will help us track who adds those urls. In short: no worries about tracking, just make sure to use it! We will send out some reminders and updates during the year to remind you of the service, but othrewise: have fun, record experiences that might be noteworthy here (we are always looking for good WMF and guest blog posts), and give us feedback! Sadads (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- that answers my question completely. I'll go off and edit ... Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:08, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is this attitude in todays world that if a video clip (or audio clip) exists everyone with Internet access can see it (or hear it). In fact, I cannot do either at home. Internet access which is fast enough for video just costs too much. What I have is fine most of the time for what I do. I never hooked up the sound because that was an added complication and, in the store, the sound on a computer like mine was way too annoying and I'd rather keep it quiet when I'm using the computer. All but two libraries I go to expect you to bring your own earphones or buy them at the library. At another library I have very little time to see videos because when I go there it's on a day when I will be very busy. So there is only one library where I can watch videos, and there are problems with videos at this library. When I asked for help they claim it's a problem with how the videos were uploaded. I believe it's because this library has not upgraded its software because I am constantly getting warnings about software needing to be upgraded.

So you cannot assume that I watched the video. I don't even know how to get back to it. Is there some introduction to using newspapers.com that I can just read?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Vchimpanzee: Generally, the information in the video is useful, but not essential. The main function we are interested in you learning to use is the "Clippings" which has text based instructions at http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips . We had the wrong link on the on-wiki instructions, Sadads (talk) 15:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first idea I had was articles that appeared in The Charlotte Observer prior to 1985. In fact, after 1985 would be great considering I will soon lose easy access to NewsBank. But I did my search and nothing came up for the Observer.

I don't have any other ideas about how I might use this resource.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Charlotte Observer does seem to be available on Newspapers.com, can you find what you're looking for here? Sam Walton (talk) 18:50, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I just couldn't find the specific topic.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, I've found Newspapers.com, and the clipping tool to be immensely helpful and easy to use. I have, however, also discovered many instances of newspapers whose database dates conflict with their printed dates of issue. It would be excellent if Newspapers.com would provide an easy means for us to flag such problems as they are encountered so that they can be speedily fixed by the admins.Danimations (talk) 02:12, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Danimations, if you find a problem with an image, please let us know. There are a couple of ways you can do that. 1- in the right hand sidebar of the viewer (open it by clicking the red tab in the middle of the right side) you should see a flag icon and the text "report a problem" at the bottom of the information in that sidebar. Click that and a form will open that you can use to report a problem. This form will automatically let us know which image you are on. 2- at the bottom of the home page you'll find a "contact us" link that you can use to report an image problem. If you go the contact us route, please include a link to the page with a problem. We really appreciate you taking the time to let us know when you find a problem.Drinknews (talk) 16:32, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying, Drinknews. I used the mechanism you describe above a couple of times, but I went on to find many more titles with date conflict problems, and found the mechanism for reporting to be inconveniently slow. I'd like to draw your attention to another website I use, which has a great mechanism for reporting problems with data. It's not a newspaper database, but rather a biodiversity one: the Atlas of Living Australia. Note the 'Flag an issue' button on the left side of the record page... http://biocache.ala.org.au/occurrences/674fca57-613e-4fce-be26-808049738782 In my opinion, a button like this or something similar would be very useful on Newspapers.com. Danimations (talk) 01:44, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When an article runs close to or the full width of the page, creating a clipping of the whole article is problematic. The trouble is that when such a clipped article appears on its own dedicated page, the text becomes too small to read, making verification of the reference by other editors difficult. It would be excellent if wide clippings could be 'hovered over' or something similar to make the small print readable in such cases. Danimations (talk) 02:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Danimations Thanks for the recommendation. We haven't gone to the trouble of adding the hover state since you can always click through to the full image and if you click through from a clipping anyone can get to the image for free. We have had magnify tools in the past, but they haven't gotten much use. Perhaps it's something we should revisit and test. Thanks again. Drinknews (talk) 16:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Warning - I used to have over 6k clippings at newspapers.com and now I have nearly 2400. They are "upgrading" the quality of their scans and simultaneously dumping everyone's clippings, not just mine. I've used them hundreds of times in articles.

I've reported the problem with their approach in February when I still had 3600 and not a single response has come on addressing the problem. Just automatic emails that I've submitted a ticket. I'm on my third automatic acknowledgement now and I'm going public with the problem.

Please complain about the problem at http://www.newspapers.com/contact/?subject=Support

Maybe - maybe they are incoherently filtering the clipping count by where you are coming from. If you come from a place that has some kind of contract with them they appear to somehow associate those clippings with that relationship and if you log in from somewhere else the count of clippings looses the ones associated with the other location you logged in from. --Smkolins (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@HazelAB, Smkolins, and Drinknews: Thats an interesting and seriou problem, I have pinged our volunteer coordinator for the accounts (hazelab), and the outreach person facilitating the donation. One of them will help you report those issues, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 16:08, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of things going on. We did replace some older, lower quality images with better ones and we can't really transfer the clippings from the old images to the new ones because the images may be a different size, have a different crop area, etc. or in some cases they may even have a different page number if the newer images include missing pages or are organized differently with the various sections, etc. We are looking into a way to preserve the old clipping even after the page it came from is gone, but for now we have been sending a copy of the old clipping to the person who made it by email. It looks like in some cases the copy we are sending out is getting corrupted, so we are looking into that too. But, this replacement process only accounted for a few of the clippings in this case. The vast majority of the clippings are still there, but because some where done at home and others done while using an IP authenticated account through a special arrangement with a university, the count was off. Half the clippings were being counted in one place and half in another. We should be able to update things so that clippings made in either place will show up in the "My Clippings" area for the user who made them. We'll get that sorted out in the next few weeks. If you have any other questions, please let me know and I'll do my best to answer them. 174.52.130.94 (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Searching very often doesn't deliver results on the specific term being searched - a search on a specific term may return, say, 4000 results, many of which are have no relevance to the search. Trying to narrow that by the standard practice (on most other sites, at least) of searching on the term using quotation marks to exclude or reduce non-relevant results has zero effect; the exact same number of results is returned, with a large proportion of them still having no relevance to the specific search term. As an example, suppose I want to search on the name "John Jones". A search should return only results for that specific term, instead of also returning results with other terms in between - "John Paul Jones", "John and Mary Jones", etc. If I do a search for "Ford Falcon", I don't need to see results for Mustang, Fairlane, and Henry Ford, but they'll be shown as well. There should be a way of returning results relating to the precise term being searched, not ones which merely include the elements of the search term.

"Advanced Search" is of no help, as it only allows one to refine a search by date and / or place. A simple "exact match" option would be enormously helpful. Chris Keating (talk) 06:50, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the big one for me: the newspaper in which I do most of research - Melbourne, Australia newspaper "The Age" - is horrifyingly incomplete. From 1967 onward, there are great tracts of issues missing - eight full months missing from both 1972 and 1973, six from 1974, nine from 1976, 10 from 1977, and various other years also have several months missing. Not really good enough when a subscription is being paid - especially as some of the missing content can be found in Google News Archive! Chris Keating (talk) 06:50, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]