text:
Three children die in Edinburgh house fire

August 5, 2010

A criminal investigation has begun in Edinburgh after three children were killed in a fire at a three storey house just before 3pm yesterday.

Firefighters were called to the house on Slateford Road in Scotland's capital city, for a reported gas explosion, and they put out a small fire in an upstairs room. However, there was no evidence of an explosion and none of the surrounding houses were damaged. Three young children, two boys and a girl, were found to have died at the scene. Police are treating the deaths as suspicious.

A woman, believed to be the children's mother, was found injured on the ground in front of the house and there are reports that witnesses saw her jump from a third floor balcony. She was taken for treatment at the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary.

In a statement the Lothian and Borders Police said: "The investigation into the cause of this tragedy is in its early stages." However, the police have also said that there was no fault with the gas supply.

Post-mortem examinations are due to be carried out on the children's bodies. Police said no identities would be released until these were completed.

A police spokesperson said: "A criminal investigation is currently under way and nothing more can be said at this time into the circumstances which led to their deaths."

The mother of the three children, now named as eight year olds Gianluca and Augustino and five year old Cecilia Riggi, is to be questioned by police after details emerged that suggest it is unlikely the children died in the fire.

Neighbours have reported that they heard screaming from inside the house and one source said that when they found the victims lying dead in the living room it was "a horrific scene." However reports that the children died before the fire broke out have not been confirmed by official sources and only reports by neighbours and others at the scene have indicated this.

Police refused to confirm reports that the children had died before the fire broke out, and say that the results of the post-mortems would help them decide whether to launch a murder inquiry into the incident.

According to Detective Superintendent Allan Jones the mother, Theresa Riggi, and her three children had been living in Edinburgh for little over a month since they were reported missing from their home in Skene, Aberdeenshire last month. Mrs Riggi is currently in a stable condition in hospital and Det Supt Jones said they are hoping to speak to her on Thursday. He said: "She's not in a position to speak to us at the moment."

The children were reportedly at the centre of a custody battle between Mrs Riggi and the children's father, Pasquale Riggi. He has been informed and is helping police to determine the last movements of the family. He is not a suspect in the investigation. Det Supt Jones reported: "He's heartbroken but he's very composed. He realizes he holds a lot of central information that we need. We're conscious of the trauma he's gone through."

Theresa Riggi and her husband were going through divorce proceedings and she was due to appear at the Court of Session in Edinburgh on Tuesday. She apparently did not attend the hearing. At that time the judge was told that her whereabouts were once again unknown.

The Judge, Lady Clark, granted a search warrant for Mrs Riggi and said that social workers should supervise the children, applying for child protection orders if necessary, after Mr Riggi's counsel asked for an order to safeguard the children's interests.

The children were allegedly educated at home so the Social Work Department had had no contact with the family since they moved to Scotland from the US.

It is believed that Mrs Riggi may have turned on the gas, and that a neighbour smelled the fumes and called the emergency services, which may have led to the original report of a gas explosion.

Tributes of flowers have been left close to the scene with cards of sympathy and condolences.

Update on 7 August: Mother charged with murder
Lothian and Borders Police have released a statement confirming that the post mortems of Gianluca, Augustino and Cecilia have been concluded. Following this statement a warrant was issued and Theresa Riggi was charged with murder.

A spokesman for Lothian and Borders Police said: "A 46-year-old woman has been arrested and charged with murder in connection with the petition warrant which was granted earlier today,"

"Due to the medical condition of the accused, it is not at this time known when she will appear in court."

In an earlier statement Mr. Riggi released a statement saying: "Our family is struggling to come to terms with the immense and tragic loss of three beautiful children.

'Thanks to all who have offered such great comfort and support.

'We request that the media respect our privacy at this difficult time."


text: User talk:Native94080

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Native94080


text: User talk:Billbells 7

title: User talk:Billbells 7


text: User talk:-Liberty-

title: User talk:-Liberty-


text: User talk:Dimant

title: User talk:Dimant


text: User talk:DJ Jaley

title: User talk:DJ Jaley


text: User talk:Mitterertux

title: User talk:Mitterertux


text:
Talk:Three children die in Edinburgh house fire

Rename
I have written the headline for this story incorrectly. It should be :Three children..." instead of "3 children...". I don't know how to correct this as I think it involves moving the article to another headline and deleting this one. Could someone more experienced do this please? FireLyte--spyre (talk) 10:05, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Done InfantGorilla (talk) 15:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Review of revision 1072593 [Passed]

 * Good luck with this one FireLyte; it was just along the road from my work yesterday. I did contemplate heading to it, but was too late to have seen anything worth photographing. "Terrace" is wrong though; the Sitehill buildings are not such. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 21:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Terrace

 * If you want an idea what the buildings were/are like; go to maps.google.co.uk and search for Calder Road, Sighthill, Edinburgh. The incident was somewhere to the east of the Heriot Watt campus. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 21:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks I've corrected the "terrace" part. Good that someone knows the area and can correct these things. FireLyte--spyre (talk) 13:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I belatedly renamed the article from Three children die in Edinburgh terrace fire to Three children die in Edinburgh house fire. Hope that helps. --InfantGorilla (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Update added
New update added to developing story. Probably won't develop much more now. Sources added in second edit. FireLyte--spyre (talk) 00:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 * This update was added 27 hours after the first publication, as far as I can tell. Articles are supposed to be stable at that point, and updates go in new articles.  However, a reviewer approved the update, (it is not long over 24 hours) so it would be inappropriate to retract it now.

 * A major disadvantage of the current situation is that your work probably didn't get the audience it deserved, as people who had already read it wouldn't know to come back, and those who hadn't would think it is two day old news. A new article would have had a current deadline dateline, and a headline and lead that highlight the homicide charge.

 * It would be interesting to review the way wikinews and other outlets covered complex quickly developing stories like Raoul Moat, US Airways Flight 1549, and the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami and see if there are ideas we can glean for even better coverage in future.

 * --InfantGorilla (talk) 08:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I know I'm being a really fucking nitpicking pedant bastard here, but I can't resist suggesting that the phrase "homicide charge" should be kept out of articles on this case because it might be a touch confusing to the more clued-up of Scotland's citizens. Scotland has a charge of culpable homicide, which is unusual in Europe as most other nations - including our companions on the other side of the line - use manslaughter. Culp. hom. is a mandatory alternative charge to murder in Scotland, and anyone charged with murder may therefore be found guilty instead of the lesser charge. *Grins* Sorry, temptation knocked. I'll be good from now on or maybe not... Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 09:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 * You're right that it would have been more effective as a new article. The reason I made it an update was mainly because I was worried it would take too long to pass review and be published, and by then the story, which would have been quite short anyway, would be stale. Perhaps I was wrong and it would have been better as a new story. The 24 hour rule is a good one and there appears to be some kind of line or balance here between updates and new development stories. I'll try and stick to the 24 hour rule and that should give a kind of guidance for this. FireLyte--spyre (talk) 23:47, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Off topic: Scotland's legal system

 * Thanks for the recommendation and the education. I know about fifteen person juries, but I didn't know anything about criminal charges for causing death. Feel entitled to replace the word 'homicide' in any article about the UK.  --InfantGorilla (talk) 10:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Haha, you should try learning the cross-jurisdictional issues that arise from the UK's weird mis-mash of three-jurisdictions-in-one. If you get your head round that I will be impressed ;). Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 10:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Is it 'three and a bit' now that Wales has its own assembly (if not its own legal system)? --InfantGorilla (talk) 14:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

 * You could argue that; it's really a thought question. I don't tend to think of it as such since, from the point of view of a court, they are one and hence serious Welsh crimes could wind up in the Old Bailey and nationally important Welsh cases can theoretically appear in London High Court. (Since we've been looking at the Scottish system, the High Court there does criminal trials, whilst the English/Welsh version is civil.) I suspect the vast majority of lawyers would agree with me; politicians, on the other hand, especially those in Wales, might go more with your view. TL;DR: If you want it to be ;).

 * From a strict legal viewpoint, however, the answer is no. You might argue four, though, since a small handful of circumstances are considered by courts with jurisdiction accross the UK... Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 14:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:Linked2Balkan

title: User talk:Linked2Balkan


text: User talk:Onevoicesomalia

title: User talk:Onevoicesomalia


text: User talk:Shouya

title: User talk:Shouya


text: User talk:Millahnna

title: User talk:Millahnna


text: User talk:Chrisheunen

title: User talk:Chrisheunen


text: User talk:Hilary reeves50

title: User talk:Hilary reeves50


text:
Thread:Comments:Northern lights may appear across Canada and northern U.S. late Tuesday night/Seen in Denmark!/reply

Some more lovely images were posted at that link, from Wisconsin, Michigan and Ontario. That is just so far south.

Tuesday night was cloudy for me, but I am glad the forecast worked out.


text:
Talk:Naomi Campbell testifies against former Liberian president

I'm not sure I totally understand the last sentence of this article:

"The court allowed Campbell a lawyer, however the lawyer cannot intervene during her testimony unless they protects her from self-incrimination."

I'm pretty sure it should be "unless they protect her from self-incrimination". But after reading the source I think it would be more clear if it said: 'The court allowed Campbell a lawyer, however the lawyer can only intervene during her testimony to protect her from self-incrimination.'

I'll change the last paragraph to that. FireLyte--spyre (talk) 12:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You know you could have just edited the article and used as your edit summary "c/e," short for "copyedit." — Mike moral  ♪♫  14:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:Zafarlatif

title: User talk:Zafarlatif


text:
User talk:DK~enwikinews

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called DK. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name DK~enwikinews that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:DK~enwikinews


text: User talk:Kasilp

title: User talk:Kasilp


text: User talk:Kenji9552

title: User talk:Kenji9552


text:
Thread:Comments:Obama approval ratings hit new lows/Comments from feedback form - "Th3e article is very well info..."

Th3e article is very well informative but, lacks depth in description in characteristics of the wars and cause of the war. REPRINT!


text: User talk:Lookesh

title: User talk:Lookesh


text:
Thread:Comments:Obama approval ratings hit new lows/Comments from feedback form - ""43% of those polled say that ..."/reply

I would guess the rest either think it was right or are not sure, with not sure's around 10-20% (what I usually see, anyways) The article indicated that the disapproval of the war has raised recently. It would have been something like 30%-35%-40%.

In brief to me these numbers don't tell anything. It's not like a few percentages would convince the government from doing anything, and they are too predictable.


text: User talk:Jacksparrow8888

title: User talk:Jacksparrow8888


text: User talk:Lynchny

title: User talk:Lynchny


text: User talk:Olzii m1

title: User talk:Olzii m1


text:
Thread:Comments:Obama approval ratings hit new lows/Comments from feedback form - "Great!"

Great!


text:
Thread:Comments:One dead after small plane crashes near Phoenix/Comments from feedback form - "Type in crashes"

Type in crashes


text: User talk:Irianto sagala

title: User talk:Irianto sagala


text:
Thread:Comments:Obama approval ratings hit new lows/Comments from feedback form - ""43% of those polled say that ..."/reply (2)

This is the longest thread on this news article so far!


text: User talk:Raganbaby6

title: User talk:Raganbaby6


text: Comments:21 sites added to Unesco World Heritage list


text:
Thread:Comments:Magnitude 7.0 earthquake hits New Britain, Papua New Guinea/Not again!/reply

I agree totally!


text:
User talk:75.139.111.29

— Mike moral  ♪♫  14:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * How in in the world did I vandalize?
 * "This is a reply" and "This is the first discussion" are useless and asinine. Please refrain from typing that otherwise your will be blocked. Have a nice day. — Mike moral  ♪♫  14:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

This is your last/only warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikinews. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do, since testing in articles will be reverted quickly. — Mike moral  ♪♫  14:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:75.139.111.29


text: User talk:Ishtiak ju

title: User talk:Ishtiak ju


text: User talk:Shovit yadav

title: User talk:Shovit yadav


text:
Mass panic as Zimbabwean officials fake air crash

August 5, 2010

Today, Zimbabwean officials informed the media that an  aircraft carrying 250 people had crashed at, before they announced the reports were false and the incident had in fact been a drill to simulate the occurrence of such an event. Initial reports suggested that a flight from London had crashed upon landing at the airport. However, Medical Rescue International later stated in a post on Facebook that no airplane had crashed and it had "joined up with other services to attend to a mock accident at Harare International Airport ... Good to keep the practising up."

Those behind the staged accident had reportedly not told any other governmental departments, resulting in relatives inquiring with Air Zimbabwe as to what had happened. A senior figure for Air Zimbabwe stated that he was "concerned that this incident led to many, many calls to us. People were frightened. No actual plane was involved, but there was a scenario involving a Boeing 767 plane that had been hijacked and forced down at Harare airport."

It was reported that Peter Chikumba, chief of Air Zimbabwe, had also not been informed that the exercise was to take place, and that the airline had set up an emergency helpdesk to liaise with the families of victims. Alan McGuinness, a correspondent for, stated, "journalists who arrived at the airport saw smoke rising from a runway and were then taken to a room where they were told to wait. David Chawota, the head of the Zimbabwe Civil Aviation Authority, said the media was duped to make the drill more realistic." Chawota stated, "telling the media was part of the exercise. We wanted to see how the media would react," he said.

Chawota himself told that an airliner had crashed. , head of BNO News said that "while I first thought Chawota was just misinformed by others, although that would be odd since he is the CEO of the aviation authority, I was stunned to hear that he actually knew it was a drill and wanted to see the media's response ... This basically means he was lying to me when I spoke to him, but also to other reporters he spoke to ... I think it was absolutely irresponsible of this CEO and I can't imagine what the families of passengers travelling to Harare around that time must have gone through when they heard news reports that there had been an 'accident' at the airport."

McGuinness reported, "Stuart Sprake, general manager of FX Logistics, works at Harare airport and believed the secrecy surrounding the drill will help emergency crews learn valuable lessons." Sprake told reporters "they (the crews) had to find their way through crowds and traffic ... training exercises should be ad hoc — the less people know about it the better."


text: User talk:DKundu

title: User talk:DKundu


text: User talk:Dean2012

title: User talk:Dean2012


text:
User talk:Peanutbutter55

This is your last/only warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikinews. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do, since testing in articles will be reverted quickly. InfantGorilla (talk) 20:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

 Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 13:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Peanutbutter55


text: User talk:Polscinyu2012

title: User talk:Polscinyu2012


text:
User:Wackywace

  Wackywace Talk  -  Contributions

title: User:Wackywace


text: User talk:Fahmimakzoom

title: User talk:Fahmimakzoom


text:
Wikinews:Flagged revisions/Requests for permissions/Archive 6

Requests
Seems like you need to work a bit more yuttleturtle. Don't let this get you down and continue to work as you have done recently for a longer time, and don't worry, the reviewer bit will be yours with a bit of patience. Diego Grez return fire 14:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I am requesting permissions in recent light of the fact that we seem to be experiencing quite a backlog for articles to be sighted. I wish to assist in reducing review times (for the good of the project). I understand that I have been on the project less than a month (and I am understanding if you think this isn't enough time), but I have extensively studied the style guide and required conventions of Wikinews. I have also created, for the newer members, a guide to synthesis article creation to avoid common mistakes and to assist in educating the conventions of news reporting (It can be found here). Mistakes that I had previously made in former articles are now corrected (and I have learnt from them). Thanks, ~YTT • (talk) 12:06, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * I'm guessing by the lack of responses and the one oppose vote that the consensus is that it is too early for me. It would be much appreciated, though, if anyone could please tell me what is expected to become a reviewer. Thanks in advance, ~YTT • (talk) 09:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Input on these nominations does sometimes take a few days. I sure hope others chime in on this, 'cause this sort of advice isn't something I'm practiced at.
 * You need more writing experience. Keep writing articles.  Show that you understand the policies and guidelines, and are good at following them — because if you peer-review we'll be relying on you to catch all significant problems with someone else's article.  Oh, and don't rush it; if it feels like you're in a hurry to get the bit, folks will get nervous, since we can't afford reviewers who will rubber-stamp articles.  We're looking for some weight of evidence that you'll wield the bit well.  --Pi zero (talk) 03:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * You're not nearly ready yet. Note that the reason for the long review delays also has to do with the fact that proper review is a huge job, on the uniformly high competence of which the survival and success of the project is crucially dependent.  --Pi zero (talk) 15:38, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I just don't fell you're quite ready. Please just continue to write for now. — Mike moral  ♪♫  04:11, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

 * ✅ --Diego Grez return fire 15:48, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Diego Grez invited me to become a reviewer. I'm familiar with the key policies, and am willing to help with article reviews. Gryllida 23:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * There seem to have been some concerns with your article NuCaptcha introduces a video captcha service, ads included, both before and after publication. Thinking now as a peer-reviewer would, what do you think of that article, and the concerns that were raised about it?  --Pi zero (talk) 14:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Not enough focus on the news event (and I realised that when writing the article), because there was not an opening ceremony or anything since this is a product release. I can't agree on the second comment about that the article is promoting the service, because there are no arguments against it which the sources would cite - and the article was attempted to be written neutrally, subjective notes are attributed to the sources they come from (though it took some editing to achieve a full effect on this point). In general what is described is newsworthy and represenents a novel trend in the web market. Gryllida 22:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * Diego Grez return fire 19:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That, for me, addresses any remaining concern you were ready for the easy come entry to reviewer. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 22:15, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * --Pi zero (talk) 22:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * — Gopher65talk 03:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Successful

Good evening everyone, I am reapplying for reviewer rights, which I last requested a month ago. I have tried my best to take the previous suggestions to heart and have been trying to tighten up on the use of unnecessary words in my articles. I have also written more content and as it currently stands I have 34 articles. However, I understand that volume of articles produced isn't the only thing taken into consideration. I have been hanging around in IRC and doing my best to follow Wikinews policies and guidelines, particularly the style guide. I have also read Reviewing articles and Flagged revisions so I know what is expected of a reviewer. Thank you. Bobby122  Contact Me   (C)  04:21, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * I started the "plagiarism" water cooler thread after the incident with one of your articles, and the discussion has since moved here. What are your thoughts on this issue?  --Pi zero (talk) 12:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with what is said there. Either a permanent link to the signpost plagiarism essay should be added somewhere noticeable or Plagiarism should be amended to include information about what constitutes plagiarism, how to avoid it while still conveying factual information and should include some of the information from the signpost article which I think is very informative. How to avoid plagiarism might seem obvious to some, the information should still be included for those unfamiliar with the concept. As for my article, at the time I wasn't aware that I had paraphrased the first two paragraphs until you had pointed them out. After this I was informed how to avoid this happening by using a completely different format than the source and also to write what you understand to have happened in your own words. I believe this information should be included in the plagiarism article also as it will help other avoid the same mistake. Bobby122   Contact Me   (C)  13:24, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

 * s. I haven't seen much of your work around here, so I just want to ask a couple of questions to see how familiar you are with the publishing policies: 1. What do you consider to be your three best published articles? 2. What are the consequences of publishing an article before it's ready? Matthewedwards (talk) 01:39, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. That's a tough decision, but I would say my three best are Typhoon Megi kills seven in Taiwan, heads towards southern China, Two Santa Clara, Utah teens in critical condition after lightning strike and 'Explosive' Haitian cholera outbreak kills 292, neighboring countries prepare. As for #2, the consequences of publishing an article that is not ready is that the unfinished article, the article containing libel, a copyvio article or an article with incorrect information is sent to the Google news and twitter feed for all to see. Once it goes there it is very difficult to remove it and the person who the libel was written about, or the news service that was copyrighted can sue you for many million dollars. They do not go after the Wikimedia Foundation, but after you as an individual, so a reviewer must be very careful as to what you publish.

Votes

 * Easy comes, easy goes. I am sure you won't fuck it up. Diego Grez return fire 19:53, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * --Pi zero (talk) 14:09, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Bobby's learnt quickly. I'm happy enough to support. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Closed as unsuccessful — Mike moral  ♪♫  06:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I need flag to mark my edits as sighted, Thank you Mjbmr   11:33, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments
Thank you Tyrol5, I said i just need flag to mark my edits as sighted, I got good work in other wikis, if there is problem you can say it to me then i will solve it, not get me an oppose vote, You have humiliated me with this work Mjbmr   15:54, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That is a concerningly obtuse response to a good-faith oppose vote. If you understood the key reasoning behind Flagged Revisions being in-place on this wiki, you'd probably have put together a better-formulated request. Personally, there's absolutely no way on earth I'd support you having sighting rights on the main namespace due to grammar; but, for non-mainspace interwiki, it might be perfectly reasonable. --Brian McNeil / talk 17:55, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * While I'm not certain (and I have not been following any additional en.WN drama), it's my impression this user is an active contributor and marketer for fa.WN. Xyr primary activity on en.WN is interwiki linking as fa.WN develops portals and similar stable pages. I don't believe anyone has taken the time to explain to xyr how the Reviewer privilege is really not required, and even should not be used, for the purpose of approving interwiki edits (as it is prone to also approve without review any edits since the last sighting.) Instead, xe should just edit and let others more active in this language do the revision review to make sure nothing unreviewed is sighted. -  Amgine | t 22:42, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * It's just to early. Getting reviewer not only gives you the right to sight edits, but the right to publish articles. This isn't to be taken lightly and it is my recommendation that you should accumulate more experience on Wikinews before requesting this permission. Tyrol5 (talk) 15:30, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You haven't written any articles and made only 48 edits on the English Wikinews. Just because you've contributed productively on other Wikimedia Foundation projects, doesn't mean you automatically get rights here. Secondly, your response to Tyrol5's oppose vote was quite rude—if you have reviewer status you have quite a bit of power. You can publish articles that may be copyright violations and they will instantly appear on Google News—for such an occurence it is not accpetable to be told you have made a mistake and you must do better next time. Please make at least 150 edits on this wiki and write a few articles before you apply for reviewer again. If you need any help, I'm always willing to help you out.  Wackywace dictaphone 17:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I this request if the user in question is just gonna use the tool only for sighting his own interwiki edits, nothing else. If not, I strongly, per above. --Diego Grez return fire 17:36, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Closed as not successful. Bobby, your work is much appreciated. Keep it up for two more weeks or so and reapply again. --Diego Grez return fire 15:37, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I have only been here for about a week or so, but have created 10 articles. My experience here has taught me the basic style rules that a news writer has to abide by. I have also realized what an important role reviewers play as if they publish things such as copyright violations or libel they can get into serious trouble. I would love this permission because I have noticed that there is sometimes a backlog of articles which need to be reviewed and it would help to have minor edits sighted, so that important changes can quickly be made. Thank you, Bobby122   Contact Me   (C)  05:21, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * I'm likely to keep out this vote, but will remark that - based on the lightning struck teens - you show good potential. Key to improvement is Pleonasm: 'omit needless words'. Go read Orwell's Horizon essay linked to from the Style Guide, reflect on applying that to your articles, and you'll be well-sorted. --Brian McNeil / talk 08:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have seen this editor doing good work, but I'm not sure if to support or not. --Diego Grez return fire 20:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Could an admin close this? (Barkingfish barked at me for performing non-admin closures at Accreditation requests!). Tyrol5 (talk) 01:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm disinclined to close right now; there's only been one vote. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 15:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * One week is really not enough time, 10 articles or not.  — fetch · comms  02:50, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Learning and trust-building take time; volume alone won't answer. --Pi zero (talk) 17:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Solid article writer, has learnt well from experiences. Do you accept, Tyrol? Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 13:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, BRS, and all of the editors who have displayed their opinions thus far. I accept the nomination and look forward to contributing more in the future. Tyrol5 (talk) 18:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 13:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * . I assume xyr tweak of this page implies nom acceptance. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:34, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well that was to close the nom below (promoted by BRS) about ten min. before this nom was added, and I was not around when BRS kindly nominated me. Anyways, just thought I should clarify that. Also, I am a male. Just letting everyone know so they don't have to type xe. Tyrol5 (talk) 18:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Fantastic article writer...will be a good reviewer as well. red  - thunder  .  15:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * --Pi zero (talk) 16:07, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * great user. --Diego Grez return fire 16:08, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * — Mike moral  ♪♫  16:39, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Its insane that you're not a reviewer yet. super support. Bawolff ☺☻ 20:58, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Done by.

Request to have my reviewer rights reinstated after I asked for their removal in July. I'm not going to pretend that I'm going to spend lots of time reviewing articles, but every little helps. More importantly, though, I don't see why someone else should need to sight simple corrections like these ones. Bencherlite (talk) 16:05, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Since you didn't resign under a cloud, I've simply reinstated the rights. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 16:09, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Closed as successful. — Mike moral  ♪♫  01:35, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

User's creating good articles, updating leads, and all that good stuff, no reason why he shouldn't have reviewer. Bawolff ☺☻ 17:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * No discussion in three days, someone should close this. Tyrol5 (talk) 21:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * as nom. Bawolff ☺☻ 17:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Great user. Tyrol5 (talk) 19:13, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't want to be a partypooper, but I'm not sure if to give Wacky the reviewer bit. He's written good articles, though. --Diego Grez return fire 19:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * per bawolff. — Mike moral  ♪♫  20:06, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm a touch conerned by the tendency to use long quotes from source articles, but reviewer is an easy come, easy go tool and this is a stellar user. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * as not yet ready. The first half or so of this, at least as originally submitted for review, seems to have been a copyvio of the AP source.  (I'm still uncomfortable with how close they are.)  --Pi zero (talk) 00:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Disruptive request, as noted by Sonia. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 09:29, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I've been an active member of the enwiki community, I'd like to participate on cross-wiki activities. Fridae'sDoom (talk) 03:56, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * This user has a pattern of asking for rights with little reason to do so. For example, he has three edits at simplewiki, two of which are requesting rollback- without heeding his first decline. He has also asked for rights here, here (without clarifying why crat is even in the picture), here, here, here, and these are only the on-wiki ones that have been brought to my attention- I'm sure there's more. He's an industrious contributor, but needless to say this worries me. sonia 09:09, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * First edit on Wikinews was to post this. It doesn't matter if you're an active member of the enwiki[pedia] community here. This is Wikinews, a separate project, and we give out reviewer flags to people who write news, not the people that post a request for reviewer permission after doing nothing. Diego Grez return fire 03:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, whilst your contributions on en-WP are commendable, you need to demonstrate your ability to write articles on Wikinews before I can in all good conscience support a request for the reviewer permission. You don't need the reviewer permission to write, copyedit, or categorise articles; once you have between five and ten good articles under your belt I'm sure I will have no problems supporting you. Happy editing. --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 08:43, 4 September 2010 (UTC) When I say "good articles" I mean articles that are good, not the equivalent of en-WP GAs or our very own FAs --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 08:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Request failed. red  - thunder  .  15:54, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello! I'm applying to become a reviewer again. I think I've fixed a lot of what everyone pointed out before, and I've also seen some vandalism too. Thanks, --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * Can you show some examples of what you have changed since your last request, only two weeks ago? Why do you deserve the reviewer tools now more than you did two weeks ago? red  - thunder  .  17:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've beefed up my knowledge of the Style Guide (like using USD or US$ instead of $), made more articles and also fixed the problems that other people pointed out the last time I requested, like the white space, style guide knowledge and polishing and editing articles more before they get published (like Lou Piniella retires after fifty years of baseball and Wikinews Shorts: August 18, 2010). --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 01:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think perhaps that it's time for an admin to close this. Tyrol5 (talk) 14:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * This user has displayed a deep interest in the project and is indeed working hard to improve it; however, I would like to see a bit more experience (previous request was two weeks ago, another not long before that). Tyrol5 (talk) 23:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

 * What, again? . The community has shown you that you're not ready for reviewer flag several times. This I'm-running-for-reviewer-the-next-week is getting annoying. Diego Grez return fire 23:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Appending: Never, per his refusal to respond anything for 2 days to my suggestions on his talk page. That's exactly what I don't hope from a reviewer. Discussions are vital on wikis. Diego Grez return fire 00:36, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd like two more weeks of your great work for Wikinews and I'll give you my support vote. — Mike moral  ♪♫  00:56, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, please do take a look at Strunk's Elements of Style to improve your writing. Good writing is concise as Strunk shows in Rule 13. — Mike moral  ♪♫  06:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Sorry, Shankarnikhil88 is a great asset to the site, and has produced some good articles, but Talk:Airliner crashes in China, 42 killed suggests that they don't yet really know how to check presentation and facts before they put an article up for review. While some writers come here fully formed, Shankarnikhil88's experience shows that it takes some time to develop news writing skills to the standards that Wikinews sets for itself. --InfantGorilla (talk) 10:32, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * нет (Nyet, No, Uh-uh...) - I have no doubt you will be an asset, someday, but jumping in and finishing other people's work with not all the information included is not gonna help you. If you jump on reviews like that, it's only gonna be a matter of time before you make a fatal mistake, publish the wrong thing (libel, etc) and get sued. BarkingFish (talk) 20:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Request failed.

Hi guys! Many of you should be remembering me and some shouldn't be. Anyhow, my name is Srinivas and I have been on a long break of an year on Wikinews. Before taking the break, I had requested for editor (see this) and it failed disastrously. Now that I have come back, I would like to request again. I don't mind if this fails, I only want to see what progress I have made!

After the failure of my previous request, I decided that I would never request again but now I have done so because I want to help in the process of reviewing. I have observed that wikinews has become slow. The articles created get published after a day except for the breaking news ones which also take half a day. I want to lend a helping hand to the reviewers and make wikinews a bit more faster. That's all. -- Srin  ivas  10:14, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * . You not only, as BloodRedSandman points out below, face being sued for libel an/or defamation should you publish vicious diatribe; you face charges of copyright violation if you reproduce the words of others, even with an adjective or two switched. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:05, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * Okay articles, but work on some spelling and grammar errors please. --Shankarnikhil88) (talk) 12:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC))
 * Oppose per Alexandr Dmitri. --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 19:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Contrib history looks good, but I would like to see some work with grammar errors, as mentioned above. Tyrol5 (talk) 13:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * per Tyrol. I'm not sure if you should be granted this tool, reviewing is completely different to write articles. Diego Grez return fire 17:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you have a lot to give to Wikinews, and I appreciate your work here an awful lot; I truly hope that you will continue to contribute if this request fails. However, I am not comfortable with the number of gramatical errors you make for you to be reviewing other people's articles. One of the roles of a reviewer is to pick up on errors and correct them, and I'm afraid that I don't have sufficient confidence in your ability to do so. Most regretfully --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 14:47, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I must agree with Alexandr. I'm mostly concerned about you leaving close wording to the source articles in the article you write. I found two close wordings in this article. — Mike moral  ♪♫  17:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, this raises more concerns. I suggest Strunk's Elements of Style and (re-)reading WN:SG. And again, more close wordings, enough to be a copvio. — Mike moral  ♪♫  22:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Both AD and Mike raise valid points. Try not to be put off, but reviewing is tough. If you fuck up a review and mistakenly publish libel, you can be sued. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Request failed.

Yes, it's been a fairly short time since the last time I've requested the permission to obtain reviewer permission. However, I've done a lot recently, and if you haven't noticed, I've cleaned up my user-page to distinguish articles I edited a lot to ones I didn't really touch. I've been creating new Wikinews Shorts- two new ones have been published. I've been following the style guide (of course- If I wasn't, would I be applying here?). On one day, I wrote up 3/4 of the articles published. Anyway, I base my request on the fact that I've created 29 articles (over 1,180 edits) in little over two months and also that I genuinely think that I will make a good reviewer and I'd be a positive addition to the Wikinews community.

Comments
Yes the bit is "easy come-easy go", and it's also "easy" to publish an article, but as I understand it, because we send published articles to Google News it's not easy to unpublish one that has been published with issues. Shank, when you add review to an article you've written, you're basically saying that "This is ready to be published, no more work can go into improving it. It's verified, it meets the SG, it's factually correct, it's NPOV, etc, so let's get it out there at the top of Google News for the world to see." That basically, if you were a reviewer and the article was written by someone else, you would be happy to publish it as-is. But your most recent article failed its review twice, another article required 20 edits between you asking for review and it being published, this one also failed a review twice, and required a large amount of editing before it did get passed. As such, I don't think you're ready just yet. That isn't to say you won't be, because there are articles like this and this that show that the potential is there, just that there are fewer of these examples than examples of the "not ready" variety. Also just wanted to note that looking through your last 500 edits, your copyediting and work on other peoples' articles, the work you did on the two Shorts for Aug 8 (even though they ultimately didn't get published), are definitely a positive and work in your favor for next time you request the bit. Finally, while it has no bearing on your request for the bit, your willingness to work on the Quiz and cat creating is also something to be acknowledged for your willingness to improve the site. You're already a positive addition to the Wikinews community, and I also agree that you will make a good reviewer, just give it a little bit more time. :) Matthewedwards (talk) 00:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Could someone close this? Let's not make this a pile on. Tyrol5 (talk) 14:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * What is the urge to have reviewer. What does it do? Publish articles. Nothing special, and not much time has passed since your last request. Diego Grez return fire 00:10, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The point is that I'd like to publish articles, and I think I'm capable of doing so. Just because not much time has passed doesn't mean that you have to count that as a point against me. --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 01:26, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 *  Per the concept of "easy come-easy go". If you need assistance on what to do, and the style guide please don't hesitate to poke me on my talk page. (images don't need to be 300px-250px, thumb is enough, please) --Diego Grez return fire 17:53, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * per Matthew Edwards. If you want I can teach you how is the review process, just leave me a note at my talk if you want :-) Diego Grez return fire 17:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * provided you brush up on WN:SG and WN:REV; it's easy come, easy go, after all. — Mike moral  ♪♫  05:07, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * per Matthew. — Mike moral  ♪♫  01:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

 * thou protests too much, and still seem too weak on policy and style points. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 05:10, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I would like to see better understanding of the style guide before you become a reviewer. Tyrol5 (talk) 16:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I would have supported in another week or two, but I don't feel confident that you know your way around the style guide in a few days since the last request (see your talk page). Also, please remove that dreadful whitespace between bullet points in listing sources. No need for a line break after each one.) Sorry, whitespace is my pet peeve.  — fetch · comms  17:25, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * -- see my comments above. Best, Matthewedwards (talk) 00:54, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * since you still need to work on you style guide knowledge etc. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 18:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

'''Unanimous support (ten support vote). Closed a few hours early.''' — Mike moral  ♪♫  05:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm slightly humbled that this user even stuck around, but it's clear to me he knows his way around this project now. Do you accept, Matthew? Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * Thank you, BRS I'd actually been considering whether to do this all this week, what with us losing a lot of users and it causing a large backlog of unreviewed articles. However, I had decided to put it off for a while as I didn't want any request to result in getting a number of, let's say, guilt-supports over what happened when I first came here, especially when I'm still seeing my name mentioned in certain discussions. Or as a reward for sticking around. Why am I still here? Because I like to write, I support Wikimedia's projects, and pretty much everyone was sincere and honest when everything became clear. And also in large part to the emails that Brian has sent me. So yes, I will accept the nomination for Reviewer. :)
 * For anyone who hasn't kept up, I've written about 8 articles so far. Some might consider to be not enough but I haven't had any kicked back at the revewing stage yet and although I did have a couple of slip ups at the beginning (like ), I've learned from that, studied the SG, and so I do think I'm probably ready to review. Thanks again, Matthewedwards (talk) 19:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * , obviously, as nom. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:32, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Bawolff ☺☻ 19:32, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You've created good articles, and you have showed to be a great editor. Yes! --Diego Grez return fire 19:33, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * --Pi zero (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Tyrol5 (talk) 23:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 00:29, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * — Reviewer is meant to be given out with alacrity to any who demonstrate a basic understanding of the styleguide and peer review process. I think this user has demonstrated basic competence, with a willingness to continue learning. Gopher65talk 02:34, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * — Mike moral  ♪♫  04:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * For persistence and cluefulness --InfantGorilla (talk) 10:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * . Matthew has, despite our earlier dreadful treatment, become a productive community member, learned the key policies, &c. Very much trust with this responsibility. ( Now back to, repeatedly, breaking my PC as I learn to build custom bootable ISOs. ) -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 11:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Shows a good understanding of the SG. --Cspurrier (talk) 00:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Nominator withdrew. Diego Grez return fire 17:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I'm applying for reviewer status again. I've written over 15 articles and three World News Quiz, and I know the Style Guide really well. --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 18:36, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * Benny the mascot (talk) 15:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't trust this user with reviewer flag, specially when he claims to "have significantly edited" several articles, when he just corrected some wordings. Diego Grez return fire 17:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * On my user page it says "for the articles I've edited, some of the edits are significant, others not as much." I have not specifically claimed to "significantly edit" any one article. --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 18:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * per Diego's comment; mischaracterises the nature of xyr contributions. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 19:37, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Look now- I've sorted them out. --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 20:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've seen a need to copyedit your articles quite a bit (you could also add interwiki links to more of them), and I'm not sure what happened with Obama approval ratings hit new lows. Also, I'm not sure why you use HotCat to add lots of categories one at a time, rather than just typing them out all at once. These are minor-ish issues, so it's a neutral for me.  — fetch · comms  22:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not going in either direction for letting you have the review right. — Mike moral  ♪♫  22:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Shankarnikhil88 is very productive and helpful, but I don't think xe understands policy as fully as a new reviewer should. Xe put a lot of work into Truck drivers strike in Greece earlier this week, and put it up for review, while perhaps unaware that (a) the strike was over (b) the sources were not independent of each other.  That is the kind of knowledge that can only be gained with more experience on the other side of the fence. --InfantGorilla (talk) 16:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems that my application is getting nowhere. I would like to close my request (as before) and apply later when I understand policy better. If it seems that I don't understand a policy, can someone who knows it point it out for me please in the future? Plus, according to many people's comments, reviewer is supposed to be easy-come easy-go, and I don't understand why people who have written five articles can get reviewer status when I've written close to 20 and I can't get that privilege. Thanks, --Shankarnikhil88 (talk) 17:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Prolly because they understood quickly that we don't publish old stories (such as the strike in Greece), and most importantly the style guide. Diego Grez return fire 17:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Removal
User has retired from the project, see the Departure lounge. BarkingFish (talk) 21:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Per a comment made by Brian McNeil, I would like to know if I'm still trusted by the community to hold reviewer rights and there doesn't seem to be a reviewer reconfirmation. If there is no consensus that I should keep the rights, the closer should remove them from me. I will note that I am largely inactive at the minute, partly because I've become somewhat disillusioned and partly because of commitments on Wikipedia and in real life. Thank you for your consideration. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?   23:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments

 * HJ Mitchell, I really want to understand, before voting on this, what went on behind the scenes of your publication of Venezuelan army on high alert after Chávez cuts diplomatic ties with Colombia. Were you aware, when you published it, of our site policies on section names and on single-source articles?  If you were aware, did you remember to check these; and, in particular, if you did check the single-source issue, what did you conclude about it and why?  --Pi zero (talk) 04:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your consideration. When I published it, I wasn't actually aware of the single-source policy (though I very much am now!) but I was well aware of the importance of verifiability, which I thought was satisfactory in that article between the AFP source and the Spanish Wikinews article from which the English article had been partially translated. I am fairly familiar with the Style Guide, but not intimately familiar with all aspects of it. Specifically to the "see also" point, I suppose that's just what 25,000 edits on Wikipedia will do to you. It barely registered that the section was there, let alone that it was improperly titled. I can't promise I'll always catch that kind of thing before I publish otherwise fine articles, but I will do my best. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?   17:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I am somewhat concerned with the publication of Australian Prime Minister accused of poor leadership on climate change. The title is weasel words - no one is identified as accusing the Prime Minister. There are extensive flaws in the article, from the misleading lede paragraph - stating a "bipartisan" opposition when there are three parties opposed and two plus governing party in favour is at best disingenuous - to its mention of Mathew Tukaki, formerly of Drake Australia but currently CEO of SansGov. How many of the sources were examined to find the quotes, which are occasionally taken out of context? (a traditional symptom of context-twisting is very brief one or two word quotes, and a good tool for identifying when an article should undergo a more-thorough assessment imo.) Publishing such an article does not give me good faith in the reviewer's dedication to NPOV, or verification. -  Amgine | t 05:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Will you improve? Australian Prime Minister accused of poor leadership on climate change relies so heavily on one source that, as far as I can see, it is copyright infringement, (and I have proposed it for deletion.) --InfantGorilla (talk) 09:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I did read the source in order to fact-check the article. It was my opinion at the time that the paraphrasing wasn't close enough to be of major concern, however, I don't disagree with your actions– it's definitely better to be safe than sorry and perhaps I should have insisted on looser paraphrasing an better sourcing. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?   17:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

 * — I'd like to once again note that Reviewer rights are easy-come easy-go. Even if HJ's rights are revoked, there is nothing from stopping him from reapplying (successfully I mean) in a couple months if he feels that he's up for it. Rockerballer has gone through this process several times already. So HJ: don't take it as anything more than a slap on the wrist if Reviewer rights are removed from you. And everyone else: don't be afraid to vote your real thoughts on this in either direction. If he keeps his flag, great. If he loses it, it's not a that big a deal. Easy-go, easy-come. Gopher65talk 01:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Votes

 * I don't see anything wrong with your reviews. Benny the mascot (talk) 23:24, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * rights. A lot of controversy seems to surround your publishing this article, which, although ideally should have linked to the sources more clearly, nonetheless meets our standards from what I can tell. I'd like to suggest, thought, that you cool off a bit, in regards to your recent comments; we're having enough trouble with an angry, unwelcoming atmosphere as it is and this doesn't really help, although I can understand your frustration. <font face="Georgia">Tempodivalse <font face="Georgia">[talk]  02:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You haven't done anything wrong here, keep them. --Diego Grez return fire 02:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Overreaction (again) from Brian. C628 (talk) 03:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't get me wrong, some of those reviews should have been done differently. However no one is perfect, live and learn. Its a wiki after all. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Since voting I became aware of the controversy surrounding Australian_Prime_Minister accused_of_poor_leadership_on_climate_change. Which I consider more serious. Well I still am not voting remove, I'm moving my vote to a . Bawolff ☺☻ 22:44, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Remove I believe the contributor is unaware of, or does not care for the effort involved in, Reviewing articles. This vote is also influenced by the user's choice of dispute resolution tactics, which suggest a lack of support for either the community or its goals. - <span style="font: italic 10pt/12pt cursive;"> Amgine | t
 * for publishing this as well as a copyright violation which risk GNews delisting us. --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 17:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Remove Reluctantly. Despite willingness to learn and a laudable work ethic, the contributor has since [ passed reviews] on a couple of inappropriately short articles, [ one of which] had two spelling mistakes, despite being just four sentences. Whether this RFP passes or not, I recommend that they spend a bit more time copy-editing or writing here before picking up the review tools again.  Review is not a tool for a person in semi-retirement. --InfantGorilla (talk) 16:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I did fix several spelling/style errors in that article before I published it, but I missed those. <font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">HJ Mitchell | <font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts?   17:08, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * A few bad calls but I think this is due primarily to the recentish high stress levels project-wide and his lower level of activity here. I expect near-perfection if the rights are retained and more writing if removed.  — fetch · comms   18:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * . Australian Prime Minister accused of poor leadership on climate change was unfortunate, but paraphrasing like that is indeed difficult to judge, so on its own could be considered a forgiveable lapse. I am more concerned at this, which despite being so short managed to contain an incorrect statement (the Galaxy S was released in the UK several weeks ago, it was only a new marketing campaign that began last week), and numerous clear grammatical errors, including the title. Reviewer status is supposed to be "easy come, easy go", and I think that HJ Mitchell would benefit from some time off to spend copy-editing and writing. I have every confidence that I will be able to support him regaining reviewer status soon. the wub "?!"  19:31, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Per Bawolff, you live and learn. If we were all perfect and knew everything, there'd be no need for Wikipedia :) I say we give him a chance to show us he can follow rules, and not simply strip him of rights because he did a few things wrong. Big whoop. Show him his mistakes, show him the right way of doing stuff, and get on with it :D  BarkingFish (talk) 20:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * . Unfortunately, HJ Mitchell is not starting from a position of substantially understanding Wikinews; they have not yet truly assimilated basic principles, and the learning curve for those should be completed before making publication decisions.  Despite, as InfantGorilla well puts it, willingness to learn and a laudable work ethic.  --Pi zero (talk) 23:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * — I think he'll be fine. He's learning. It takes a while to adjust here sometimes if you come from Wikipedia. In the future though, we should be careful to make sure Wikipedians are fully aware of the differences in policy between Wikinews and Wikipedia (and the reasons for those differences). Gopher65talk 03:14, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's a fair assessment. "Surprisingly" enough, I didn't go through the process and had my rights granted without request. I wouldn't object to their removal on the grounds that they were given outside of process but even I was a new editor then (I didn't have sysop rights at the English Wikipedia either). If you look at the articles that I've written and the reviews that I've completed thus far, I think you would agree that after some adjustment or collaboration with the author that the articles met our guidelines for publication. I am sorry, but until HJ becomes more diligent in reviewing articles and informs himself of local policy (i.e., gains more experience), I cannot support keeping the right. Blurpeace  08:40, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

 * , with the recent publication of Loneliness unhealthy as smoking and alcoholism, new study says. I'm sorry, but I've never seen such a low quality article (it's missing punctuation and good flow) be our current main lead. A few mistakes here and there are fine but consistently problematic reviews are more concerning. As Gopher65 succinctly said above, "easy-come easy-go." FWIW, I'd rather see HJ resign the right himself in the face of highly reasoned objection. Blurpeace  08:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The stated intent of this self-nomination is that it be a reconfirmation rather than a removal: HJ Mitchell requested that whoever closes this should remove their reviewer bit unless there is an actual consensus for them to retain it (rather than requiring consensus to remove, as is the case with Brian McNeil's de-sysop).  --Pi zero (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, right. That is much more commendable on the part of HJ than I was first led to believe. Thanks, Blurpeace  15:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:Fffling

title: User talk:Fffling


text: User talk:MikeDok1

title: User talk:MikeDok1


text:
Nigel Lythgoe to return as executive producer of 'American Idol'

August 5, 2010

In a statement released earlier today, announced that British producer  would rejoin  as the television series' executive producer. Lythgoe formerly held the position for the first seven seasons of the series.

Lythgoe, who had been with American Idol since its inception, left to concentrate on dancing show  two years ago. Fox said that Lythgoe would continue as a judge and executive producer of So You Think You Can Dance. He will join executive producers, Cecile Frot-Coutaz, and for the  of Idol.

The announcement, which had been rumored for several weeks, came during a period of falling viewership for the show, as well as the departure of two judges on the show. and will not return for the tenth season of American Idol, which begins airing in January 2011. Fox says that it will have selected replacements in time for the show's auditions next month, but who those replacements will be has been the subject of media speculation. Some reports claim that actress or musician  may join the show. Other changes to the show include lowering the minimum age for contestants to fifteen and reducing the results episodes to 30 minutes.

Along with friend Simon Fuller, Lythgoe helped to create the UK series , later working with Fuller to bring the series to the United States as American Idol. Working with Idol "not only was an inspirational journey into the heart of American pop culture, it opened my eyes to the untapped potential of the incredibly dynamic young people in this world," Lythgoe said.


text: Comments:Black Eyed Peas to release new album, 'I Gotta Feeling' reaches six million downloads


text: User talk:DarkTempTatiOnN

title: User talk:DarkTempTatiOnN


text:
Two die in school bus accident in Missouri, several others injured

August 5, 2010

An accident involving two school buses, a tractor trailer and an sport utility vehicle has left at least two people dead and fifty more injured about 40 miles outside of St. Louis, Missouri according to reports.

The incident occurred Thursday morning on I-44 in Gray Summit between 10:15 AM (15:15 UTC) to 10:30 AM local time (15:30 UTC) according to Jorma Duran, a spokesman for the Missouri Department of Transportation.

The school buses were carrying students from St. James High School and were en route to the Six Flags St. Louis amusement park, approximately 10 miles (16.1 kilometres) from the scene of the accident.

It wasn't immediately clear how exactly the collision happened.


text: Talk:Two die in school bus accident in Missouri, several others injured


text:
Wikinews:Dynamic quiz/quiz/2010/32

Welcome to the Wikinews World News Quiz, giving you a chance to test your knowledge on this week's news.

Last Updated: August 5, 2010

title: Wikinews:Dynamic quiz/quiz/2010/32


text: User talk:Btouburg

title: User talk:Btouburg


text: Comments:Two die in school bus accident in Misssouri, several others injured


text: User talk:Johnwarrenlewis

title: User talk:Johnwarrenlewis


text: Talk:Nigel Lythgoe to return as executive producer of 'American Idol'


text: Comments:Nigel Lythgoe to return as executive producer of 'American Idol'


text: User talk:FlyJaw

title: User talk:FlyJaw


text:
Football: Coach of North Korea condemned to hard labor

August 6, 2010

According to Radio Free Asia, North Korean authorities are retaliating against players in the who played in the. The team lost all three matches. It was only the second time that the North Koreans had qualified for the World Cup finals.

Members of the squad, excepting nationals  and  who were in their homeland, were publicly shamed in a -style event where more than 400 people, including journalists and political leaders, insulted and humiliated the team.

Following the event, the team's coach has been sentenced to hard labor following a speedy trial. "He will carry loads on a building site for fourteen hours a day," reports. He was found guilty of "betrayal of trust of Kim Jong-un", the son and heir of country leader Kim Jong-Il who determined the final team roster, and allegedly expelled from the Worker's Party.

In the past, national coaches have not returned to their countries following losses in the finals in the World Cup. In 1978, Mexican coach, Jose Antonio Roca would not return to his country following the elimination of the team in the first group stage. Like their North Korean counterparts who lost 7–0 against Portugal, the Mexicans had suffered a heavy defeat against Germany, losing 6–0.


text: File:North Korea FA.png

title: File:North Korea FA.png


text: User talk:Williamnicolaspierre

title: User talk:Williamnicolaspierre


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world

Congratulations, America, on finally doing what the rest of the Western World did years ago! The land of the not-so-free and the home of the bravely ignorant may still have a long way to go, but at least California is no longer in the same boat as most of Africa and the Middle East (see map, right). Maybe one day the United States will finally embrace is supposedly secular founding principles, stop listening to the religious fanatics, and let people get on with their own lives without interference from the near-fascist Big Brother state. Maybe one day the United States—a nation that supposedly values liberty—will stop persecuting people for factors beyond their own control. Maybe one day gay people will have the same rights as black people and Jews, and people will stop pretending that persecuting one group of people is different from persecuting another.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply

I always find your frankly delusional comments quite sad. You can't boldly assert such laughable falsehoods as the U.S. being a Third World country without having some form of brain disease, never-mind that the whole thing is some sort of attempted guilt-by-association against opponents of gay marriage.


text:
Thread:Comments:Nigel Lythgoe to return as executive producer of 'American Idol'/Comments from feedback form - "Some information presented her..."

Some information presented here about the judges isn't right, and more has been confirmed than you've described here...


text:
User talk:Bidooshram

79.85.113.50 (talk) 19:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bidooshram


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (2)

The guilt comes not in the association, but in the fact that opponents of gay marriage are attempting to prevent two people who love each other from doing the same things of two other people who love each other for no reason other than the way they were born.

The "Third World" metaphor was just that: A metaphor. The United States clearly has a First World economy, but its civil liberties are on a par with those of some Third World countries, as the map illustrates.

On a related note, please do not accuse me of being "delusional", "sad", or "brain diseased" in future—issues can be debated without resorting to personal attacks.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (3)

Your underlying purpose was to impugn the laws and policies of the United States by associating them with Third World countries and "religious fanatics." This is a textbook example of guilt by association. The First World / Third World distinction has always been one of economics and political stability, so there you're just attempting to back-pedal and redefine terms. Considering the wide heterogeneity of countries with Third World economies, it's hard to derive anything helpful from your "metaphor."


text: User talk:SuroorPerfumes

title: User talk:SuroorPerfumes


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (4)

Actually, the Third World was initially used to describe any states that were not allied with either the USA ("First World") or the USSR ("Third World") during the Cold War. Therefore, culture is—in this original definition—also important, even if not so much as economy. The United States does bear some similarities to Third World countries, even though it is, itself, the benchmark by which the First World is defined. The metaphor implies that the United States has advanced less than the countries historically considered to be part of the Third World, putting its civil liberties on a par with theirs.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (5)

I concede the point about etymology. I shouldn't have said the "distinction has always been" such and such, but still, the primary, current use of the term is purely economic. Whether or not there is some peripheral similarity between a U.S. policy and some policy of some Third World country remains a matter of indifference and your usage was still not clearly metaphorical.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (6)

I apologise if my metaphor was not clear. On a further re-reading of my original post, I can see how it may have been misconstrued, and there are probably better metaphors that I could have used (half of which don't violate Godwin's Law).


text:
Thread:Comments:Man disguised as Darth Vader robs bank/Uh.../reply

actually, technically it is wackynews. Please sir, lighten up, you sound like a conservative southern baptist minister!


text: User talk:Blue Haze

title: User talk:Blue Haze


text:
Thread:Comments:Obama approval ratings hit new lows/Comments from feedback form - "The U.S. war in Iraq will not ..."/reply

U.S. PAID PRIVATE SECURITY FORCES (AKA mercenaries)

The trouble with Iraq is that there's just way too much oil under the ground there.


text: Comments:Naomi Campbell testifies against former Liberian president


text:
Spreading floods in Pakistan worsen, at least 1600 dead

August 6, 2010 Since last reported, the flooding in Pakistan has spread and has now struck more than four million people. The reports it has left at least 1,600 people dead. The floods have been confirmed as the worst in eighty years.

Heavy monsoon rains led to the flooding of the huge, destroying homes in the north of the country and causing a large amount of damage in the north-west frontier province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Manuel Bessler of the United Nations said: "What we are facing now is a major catastrophe. We are afraid it will get worse.”

Army and government forces have rushed to evacuate hundreds of thousands of people from parts of the Punjab province of Pakistan, where the disaster spread to yesterday, and from Sindh province, where the flood is expected to reach by the weekend.

The flooding is now in its second week and the situation is unlikely to improve any time soon, especially since in many parts of the country there is still torrential rain, with more forecast. In other parts of Pakistan the water has receded, but this leaves a layer of mud and slime and this covers very large areas. For those affected by the floods, disease is the biggest problem now. The insanitary conditions have already caused diarrhoea and respiratory infections. Cholera and other water-borne diseases may appear if sanitary conditions for those displaced by the calamity are not established. Medical supplies are desperately needed for doctors to keep a pandemic or epidemic of a water-borne disease from infecting the victims of the flooding.

Relief flights
Relief has been hardest to provide in the north-west where many bridges and roads have been washed away. Whole towns have been cut off and this makes providing aid to those areas a very difficult task.

Air force pilots have been volunteering to fly aid missions to badly hit areas, transporting medical supplies, clean water and food to where it is needed. The transport planes carry enough foodstuffs to feed one hundred families for a month. Motivation for the missions among pilots is very high, as is the tension in the transport planes as they fly at 36,000 feet over the flood-hit country. Only from the air is the full extent of the damage visible. Pilots have been flying the maximum number of hours allowed and pushing the limits of their endurance to give the victims of the flood food, water and everything they need to survive.

Foreign assistance
Many foreign governments and aid agencies are contributing to the disaster relief effort. The Army has been flying relief missions, airlifting people from areas where they are stranded. The first mission involved four U.S. Chinook helicopters landing in the tourist town of Kalam in the Swat Valley, north-west Pakistan. The resort had been cut off for more than a week, according to a reporter there. The Chinooks flew hundreds of people to safer areas lower down. A U.S. Embassy spokesperson said that 800 people had been evacuated and relief goods had been distributed.

The U.S. government pledged 10 million dollars in assistance following the first reports of the disaster. Yesterday the country promised a further 25 million dollars in aid. A spokesperson from the Embassy said: "The U.S. is making a new contribution of 25 million dollars in assistance to flood-affected populations, bringing its total commitment to date to more than 35 million dollars." The money will go to international aid organisations and established Pakistani aid groups to provide food, health care and shelter to people displaced by the floods.

Malaysia has also decided to contribute US$1 million for relief efforts in the form of humanitarian aid. The Foreign Ministry said the aid was a manifestation of the government and the people's concern and sympathy. "The government of Malaysia hopes the contribution will help alleviate the suffering of flood victims in Pakistan."

In, the Disasters Emergency Committee, an umbrella organisation representing 13 of the leading UK humanitarian agencies, has been coordinating relief efforts and has launched an emergency appeal for public donations to help the victims of the crisis. Charities and aid agencies have been quick to respond to the disaster, sending aid and response teams to the worst hit areas. Food, water, shelter and medical supplies have been provided but much more is needed.

Red Cross
Patrick Fuller of the Red Cross (the ), who has been based in the country for a few days, described the situation on the ground as "desperate" and said the worst hit areas are "totally dependent" on outside help. He said the Red Cross movement is working with local partners to get aid packages, containing cooking tools and shelter such as tents and blankets, to 35,000 families.

The Red Cross alone has distributed 10,000 food packs and 1000 tents across the affected areas so far. However, figures for the amount of aid distributed are constantly changing as this is an ongoing relief effort.

Fuller reported that in Nowshera, which is in the north-west of the country close to the Indus River, "80% of homes have been badly damaged or destroyed, all the mud-brick houses have been washed away.

"In the most remote areas - where roads are cut off - donkeys are making eight-hour hikes to reach people.

"We are trying to move people into temporary camps - giving them timber, roofing sheets and basic shelter - but there is the added complication that many are reluctant to leave whatever homes they have left." This has also been a problem in the south of the country in Sindh province, where the flood is expected to reach by the weekend. Evacuations have been going on to move people out of the path of the flood but many will not join the mass exodus and have chosen to brave the waters.

Water, food and medicine
"Many people rely on open wells, which have been contaminated, so access to clean water is a problem. We are worried about communicable diseases, like respiratory infections, skin diseases, diarrhoea," Mr Fuller said.

The charity have been setting up mobile medical teams to better combat disease and infection.

Though the relief effort at the moment is focused on the survival of those hit by the catastrophe, on those who "had their lives swept away in seconds", the relief effort is expected to last a full six months.

Those who will be most affected in the long term by this disaster will be the poorest. They will have had everything washed away from them so they will have to start from scratch. Sadly, for those living in the poorest areas in the north and centre of Pakistan, the fight for survival is only just beginning and though they may feel they are enduring much at the moment, getting their lives back together after the first stages of this calamity are over is going to be even harder.

The Disasters Emergency Committee has said it has managed to give aid to 300,000 people so far. Many UK charities have been distributing food and medicine, as well as water purification tablets, cooking tools, shelter and hygiene kits. They have been using rafts, boats and donkeys. Brendan Gormley, chief executive of the DEC, said: "These devastating floods have left millions fighting to survive with little food, clean water or shelter."

The DEC has appealed for donations from the public of the UK to help the victims of this crisis. The appeal is to allow the charities to continue relief work in the worst hit areas of the country.

Following a television appeal by the DEC, £2.5 million was raised and this has enabled the 13 charities the committee represents to reach 300,000 people with emergency supplies.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (7)

The laws and policies of the United States do share several important traits with a variety of "Third World" countries usually considered less advanced, among these: 1. The United States has not yet abolished Capital Punishment, and it is extensively practiced and legally sanctioned in 39 states. 2. Domestic surveillance on US Citizens without due process, while technically prohibited by the nation's constitution, is indeed widely practiced and has been given retroactive approval by the US Congress. 3. Homosexual citizens are legally not endowed with the same rights as Heterosexual citizens, and as such are treated as second class citizens.4. Creationism - a religious fundamentalist doctrine -is legally taught alongside Evolution in some U.S. Public Schools. 5. Racial profiling is legally enshrined by the U.S State of Arizona with regards to inquiries by law enforcement into a person's immigration status. 6. The United states has no universal publicly-funded health system for its citizens, usually considered a mark of a "Developed" nation.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (8)

It's also full of woeful exaggerations, like the claim that people are being "persecuted" who are in fact protected by law and subject to no sanctions either criminal or civil for being gay, declaring themselves to be gay, having relationships or arranging whatever ceremonies or personal vows they choose. The Proposition 8 issue doesn't even affect the possibility of civil unions that confer all the privileges and benefits of marriage under another name. Persecution usually consists of something more substantive than mere nominal distinctions.

I'm personally in favour of civil unions for everybody. The provisions of the civil unions would include joint and several responsibility for any children born to or adopted into the relationship so codified. It's not the government's business to impose any particular definition of "marriage" when that can be easily avoided. The government could introduce unions with more than two signatories and whatever other contractual structures may seem propitious and everybody can define marriage in accordance with his own conscience or doctrine. Sounds amicable to me, or at least facilitative of shunting the whole controversy off into the private realm where it belongs. When the government steps in, people are too apt to get "persecuted."


text: User talk:Diego quera

title: User talk:Diego quera


text:
Thread:Comments:Magnitude 7.0 earthquake hits New Britain, Papua New Guinea/Not again!/reply (2)

You ain't kidding, we've had 10 now in the last 36 hours, all within 2000 miles of each other... Something tells me the earth is doing more shakin' than Elvis ever managed.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (9)

Civil unions do not "confer all the privileges and benefits of marriage under another name." The very existence of such a two-tiered system denotes discrimination, as such the policy of "civil unions" shares a striking resemblance to The "separate but equal" policies used to persecute the Black minority in the United States before the US Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Such blatant legal discrimination is fundamentally inseparable from persecution.


text: Talk:Mass panic as Zimbabwean officials fake air crash


text: Comments:Mass panic as Zimbabwean officials fake air crash


text: User talk:Aberbotimue

title: User talk:Aberbotimue


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (10)

You've produced a real mixed-bag there. Some of those things aren't true or are only half-truths (4, 5), others are true but even more true of other "Developed" countries (2, which is spot on for the U.K.), some true and unfortunate (3, though you've accompanied it with severe exaggerations), and others I fully support (1, 6). I don't, however, see the point. Why should I care? Why should anybody care? This whole idea of adducing similarities to Third World countries is just a red herring when the ultimate question is the worthiness or unworthiness of particular policy positions.


text: Comments:Three children die in Edinburgh house fire


text:
User:Saga City

Thanks for dropping in, see my wikipedia page for details. Saga City (talk) 21:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User:Saga City


text: User talk:Rhentzel

title: User talk:Rhentzel


text: Talk:Google to discontinue social networking application Google Wave


text: Comments:Google to discontinue social networking application Google Wave


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (11)

You support the US killing its criminals, and not providing everyone with healthcare (in effect killing the innocent)? It has been proven that capital punishment is not an effective deterrent (crime actually rose during the Bloody Code in England), and people have been proven innocent after their execution.

As for healthcare, I don't understand how anybody can oppose diverting some government funds to keeping people alive (after all, the US seems all too happy to deliberately kill millions in violation of international law: Iraq, for example).

2 is true for the UK, yes, but that does not mitigate its effects on the US.

The Third World comment was meant to indicate the backwards and uncivilised nature of Proposition 8 (note that I am not implying that all third world countries are savage and uncivilised—some, however, are, such as Uganda), and was therefore a comment on the policy, though I admit that the discussion has been somewhat sidetracked.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (12)

Here we have a false analogy and yet more guilt by association. Racial segregation was a legally enforced policy that imposed different conditions on the "segregated" groups. Even if, in theory, the amenities were equal, one school or restaurant is not the same as another and it takes coercive force or the threat thereof to make people attend only their respective facilities. The existence of "marriages" and "civil unions" does not imply the employment of any force whatsoever, since the distinction is entirely on the part of the government. If they come with identical legal provisions, they are truly identical. Two buildings or assemblies can never be identical, only possibly, roughly, analogous. Two sets of terms that contain the same text are in fact truly identical. These distinctions are, I think, intuitively obvious to an honest reader. What we're left with are yet more guilty associations, only in this case the association itself is illusory. Not that it matters, bad arguments of this kind being thoroughly irrecoverable.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (13)

If they are the same, why do the names have to be different? The government does not want to let gay people get married, so they give them the same thing, but with a different name. That, in itself, is discrimination, as homosexuals have to call their union something different to straight people, effectively segregating the people.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (14)

By the way, de jure segregation in the U.S. was judicially invalidated by Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. The innovation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was prohibition of most kinds of discrimination by private actors, a separate issue altogether. I have some reservations from the latter on Freedom of Association grounds. Does increased acknowledgement and protection of free association among private individuals render a society more "advanced" in your view? I just notice that you tend to emphasize what you perceive to be "advanced" in the realm of law and policy, but I've come to suspect that it's just a way of begging the question by pre-assuming that your own political views are the advanced ones, and who, after all, doesn't want to be "advanced?"


text: User talk:Wikignome0530

title: User talk:Wikignome0530


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (15)

It would be interesting to hear how 4 and 5 are "half-truths" as you've put it. Creationism is legally taught in the U.S. state of Kansas (look it up if you don't believe me), while Arizona has recently passed a law requiring all police officers to inquire as to the immigration status of persons who they "suspect" may not be U.S. citizens or legal U.S. Immigrants while conducting other routine law enforcement activities, such as roadblocks and traffic stops. The very nature of such a law forces police to resort to superficial ethnic/"racial" characteristics, such as skin/hair colour, dialect etc. as guidelines for whom is considered "suspicious".

As for the comparisons of U.S. policies to "Third World" countries, it is a quite valid rubric for Americans to consider, especially as the United States conducts an aggressive, militaristic foreign policy which -although driven by geopolitics- is largely sold to the public in terms of promoting "democracy" "freedom" and "Human rights" in countries around the world. Such presumed moral authority is easily challenged if objective criteria are used to Compare the U.S. own domestic policies to those of other nations, both "Third World" and "First".


text:
User:Wikignome0530

See w:User:Wikignome0530

title: User:Wikignome0530


text:
User:Wikinews Importer Bot/LGBT

 category=Published category=LGBT notcategory=Disputed count=5 addfirstcategorydate=true namespace=main

Note. This page is used by the Wikinews Importer Bot to update the Wikipedia LGBT portal news.

title: User:Wikinews Importer Bot/LGBT


text: Talk:RAF UFO encounters may have been covered up by Churchill and Eisenhower


text: Comments:RAF UFO encounters may have been covered up by Churchill and Eisenhower


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (16)

Yes Indeed It has become sidetracked, It would be nice if the discussion stayed on the topic of the Prop 8 ruling. My "laundry list" was only meant to demonstrate the validity of using "Third world" as a rhetorical metaphor for certain U.S. policies


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (17)

I think I'll decline to take this conversation yet farther afield. I'm not the one who introduced these issues, I just indicated my range of opinions on them to illustrate that I'm willing to side with things associated with the "Third World" on some issues and not on others. There's no reason to lump any of these together or to say that something is bad just because it's associated with less economically developed countries.


text:
Thread:Comments:California's same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional; appeal expected/The US finally begins to crawl out of the third world/reply (18)

Before Civil Rights laws were passed in the US, citizens of differing races were often not allowed to marry, Such marriages were legally prohibited and not recognised by the state or federal governments. If someone suggested a law granting Interracial couples the right to "Civil Unions", rather than Marriage, It would be considered a policy of segregation or racial discrimination. It would be most enlightening to hear how discrimination by race in this regard is somehow different that discrimination on the basis of gender.