text:
User talk:Shilpam13

-- 18:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shilpam13


text:
Thread:Comments:Singer Amy Winehouse dies at age 27/R.I.P AMY WINEHOUSE

I didn't listen to your songs much but I will miss you and so will everyone else Goodbye Amy

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


text:
Thread:Comments:Singer Amy Winehouse dies at age 27/HAHAHA/reply (5)

you will die someday and guess what????? You are dead FOREVER, more than you can imagine MAKEING FUN OF SOMEONE'S DEATH ISN'T FUNNY SO FUCK YOU I HOPE YOU DIE


text:
User talk:Juank1927

-- 19:22, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Juank1927


text:
Thread:Comments:Bill passed to raise US debt limit/Comments from feedback form - "Very concise and factual stirr..."

Very concise and factual stirrup.Deserves 7 Stars!!


text:
User talk:Bryancos

-- 19:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bryancos


text:
User talk:Roxannezielke

-- 19:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Roxannezielke


text:
User talk:Vertevero

-- 19:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vertevero


text:
User talk:محمد ياسين ابوالباصر

-- 19:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:محمد ياسين ابوالباصر


text:
User talk:Ymseiler

-- 20:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ymseiler


text:
User talk:Мельхиор

-- 20:26, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Мельхиор


text:
Ralph Nader: Obama will likely face challenge in Democratic primaries

August 6, 2011

Consumer advocate and four-time presidential candidate revealed Thursday to  that there is an "almost 100 percent" chance that U.S. President Barack Obama will face a primary challenge from a. Nader has led a campaign for the past few months to draft a progressive to run in the Democratic, which are held to determine the party's presidential nominee. He insists that he will not be the candidate and has labeled a potential run for the presidency in 2012 as "unlikely".

Incumbent presidents usually do not receive any serious challenges from within their party, but it has happened in the past. Senator challenged Democratic President Jimmy Carter in, and in , paleoconservative commentator  opposed  President. Though both incumbent presidents secured their respective parties' nominations, the opposing party defeated them in the general election.

Nader has criticized President Obama for allowing the to continue late last year and is angry with the President's recent  with Republicans to cut spending. He argued that a "public works project" was necessary to create jobs.

In order for a challenge to be successful, Nader believes it must come from "an ex-senator or ex-governor [or] an intellectual leader or an environmental leader". Senator of Vermont, who denied speculation that he might challenge the president, acknowledged that "if a progressive Democrat wants to run, I think it would enliven the debate [and] raise some issues." Congressman, former Senator Mike Gravel and columnist have been mentioned as possible candidates.

A CNN/ORC International poll from last month showed that nearly one fourth of Democrats will not commit to whether they think Obama should be renominated, and nearly a quarter of Americans that oppose the president believe he is not liberal enough.


text:
User talk:Sullivac

-- 20:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sullivac


text:
User talk:Ronan222222222222222

-- 20:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ronan222222222222222


text:
User talk:Prriyankasinghvi

-- 20:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Prriyankasinghvi


text:
User talk:素手

-- 20:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:素手


text:
User talk:Miko.91

-- 21:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Miko.91


text:
User talk:RinaChan

-- 21:27, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:RinaChan


text:
User talk:Bhartshorne

-- 21:36, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bhartshorne


text:
Talk:Ralph Nader: Obama will likely face challenge in Democratic primaries

International audience
The article checks out okay - all the facts are correct, writing is good, etc. However, I think the concept of a "primary" needs to be explained to an international audience; to me, for example, they are an almost alien concept. (I do get the general idea, but mainly through trying to understand it for WN stuff in the past.)

Once that's added, another USian could probably review it without additional sourcing, since I'd hazard that such would qualify as 'common knowledge' within the US. I've checked all the facts quite carefuly and I'm willing to say this passes on verifiability, so there's no need for anyone to recheck that. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 21:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I added a link to the primary election article on wikipedia. After that I added the statement "which are held to determine the party's presidential nominee." I think that should clarify it.--William S. Saturn (talk) 21:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


text:
Juno spacecraft bound for Jupiter

August 6, 2011

On Friday at 12:25 a.m. EDT, NASA's newest spacecraft, Juno, launched into orbit from, Florida, on its way to Jupiter. Juno will engage in an analysis of the planet from an orbit around it.

Researchers hope that the spacecraft and its myriad of instruments will shed light on the origins of Jupiter. Furthermore, being the largest and oldest planet in the solar system, scientists believe that Jupiter may also hold clues to the formation and evolution of the early solar system. Additionally, the data gathered from Juno may help scientists to understand early planetary processes occurring in other star systems beyond our own.

Juno will travel roughly 1,740 million miles (2,800 million kilometers) over the course of its five-year journey.

title: Juno spacecraft bound for Jupiter


text:
User talk:Lojtass

-- 21:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lojtass


text:
User talk:Mattbutler69

-- 21:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mattbutler69


text:
User talk:Alenb06

-- 21:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alenb06


text:
User talk:Sebastian1211

-- 22:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sebastian1211


text:
User talk:DAhmst877

-- 22:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:DAhmst877


text:
User talk:Sirtao

-- 22:15, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sirtao


text:
User talk:Narcisista de oscuridad

-- 22:19, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Narcisista de oscuridad


text:
User talk:Abdighani

-- 22:23, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Abdighani


text:
User talk:Gordongreasling

-- 22:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gordongreasling


text:
User talk:Gustavo reina

-- 22:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gustavo reina


text:
User talk:Boccelounge

-- 23:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Boccelounge


text:
User talk:Rwjmgnh

-- 23:13, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rwjmgnh


text: Comments:Casablanca

title: Comments:Casablanca


text:
User talk:Eyeuser

-- 23:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Eyeuser


text:
User talk:Savvas kosmopoulos

-- 23:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Savvas kosmopoulos


text:
User talk:Mjs2600

-- 00:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mjs2600


text:
User talk:Jazzguitar09

-- 00:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jazzguitar09


text:
User talk:Zedinlimbo

-- 00:40, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Zedinlimbo


text:
User talk:Sonoramaracaibo

-- 00:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sonoramaracaibo


text:
User talk:JeffersonCapuxu

-- 01:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:JeffersonCapuxu


text:
User talk:Ebben

-- 02:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ebben


text:
User talk:Amyshe

-- 02:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Amyshe


text:
User talk:Chelseanofies

-- 02:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Chelseanofies


text:
User talk:Carthagina

-- 03:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Carthagina


text:
User talk:JEET GOSWAMI

-- 03:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:JEET GOSWAMI


text:
User talk:Kuzovkov

-- 04:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kuzovkov


text:
User talk:Cjsylvor

-- 05:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cjsylvor


text:
User talk:Atim global

-- 05:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Atim global


text:
User talk:Carvo392

-- 05:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Carvo392


text:
User talk:Kubina

— Mike moral  ♪♫  05:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kubina


text:
User talk:Hanumanna

-- 05:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hanumanna


text:
User talk:Festivaldecineglobal

-- 05:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Festivaldecineglobal


text:
User talk:Benwahbob

-- 05:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Benwahbob


text:
User talk:Julian silva coelho

-- 05:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Julian silva coelho


text: Talk:Juno spacecraft bound for Jupiter

title: Talk:Juno spacecraft bound for Jupiter


text: Comments:Juno spacecraft bound for Jupiter


text:
User talk:Abdul5385

-- 06:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Abdul5385


text:
User talk:Analaja.anu

-- 06:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Analaja.anu


text:
User talk:RonanW

-- 06:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:RonanW


text:
User talk:Hpsinghdua

-- 06:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hpsinghdua


text:
User talk:Jyonio

-- 06:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jyonio


text:
User talk:Parsa.saber

-- 07:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Parsa.saber


text:
User talk:Nejapevec

-- 07:19, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nejapevec


text:
User talk:Kleskkers

-- 07:19, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kleskkers


text:
User talk:Behin2

-- 07:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Behin2


text:
User talk:Am35920

-- 07:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Am35920


text:
User talk:Eric min

-- 08:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Eric min


text:
User talk:Ajnyani

-- 08:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ajnyani


text:
User talk:Alpunin

-- 08:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alpunin


text:
User talk:Cryogaijin

-- 08:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cryogaijin


text:
User talk:Pulvaikabilan

-- 09:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pulvaikabilan


text:
Bill to eliminate corruption does not go far enough, say Indian activists and lawyers

August 8, 2011

A bill to eliminate corruption has been introduced into the lower house of India's parliament, but critics including lawyers and human rights activists are skeptical of the measures contained.

The Draft, introduced into parliament on Thursday, seeks to establish an ombudsman, or Lokpal, to investigate wrongdoing by government and officials. It comes after decades of campaigning against government corruption and the hunger strike of anti-corruption activist earlier this year.

But the bill has been heavily criticized by Indian activists and lawyers who claim that it does not meet the needs of the people and will not free the country from corruption.

The exemption of the prime minister and other members of parliament from being investigated will prevent it from working successfully, they argue. "There is no substance in the discussion that the prime minister should be out of the Lokpal Bill," a judge on the said on Wednesday, speaking outside his official capacity.

Following his hunger strike in April, Hazare pushed Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to re-introduce the Lokpal Bill into Parliament. But he has condemned its current form calling it "a cruel joke." Hazare will again protest to have the draft bill revised and changed. "I will start my hunger strike from August sixteenth," he said.

, general secretary of the, yesterday said that the bill will set up "a very weak Lokpal – a Lokpal that has no effective powers". He also said that allowing government officials to appoint the Lokpal would affect its independence.

After meeting with lawyers of the Friday, members from, a citizen's movement, said that the lawyers agreed that the introduced Lokpal Bill would not get rid of corruption in India.

Mark Dummit, from The BBC, said that there is no guarantee that the bill will be passed. Past attempts have been denied by the upper house of Parliament since 1969.


text:
User talk:Nanboss

-- 09:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nanboss


text:
User talk:Antmya

-- 09:17, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Antmya


text:
User talk:Shivam~enwikinews

-- 09:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

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 Shivam. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Shivam~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 23:21, 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) 06:37, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shivam~enwikinews


text:
User talk:Stephwolf22

-- 09:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Stephwolf22


text:
User talk:Storm43

-- 09:53, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Storm43


text:
User talk:X-Babi

-- 10:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:X-Babi


text:
User talk:이반

-- 10:23, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:이반


text:
User talk:Oziblade

-- 10:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Oziblade


text:
User talk:Asrul echo13

-- 10:49, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Asrul echo13


text:
User talk:HelSimquia

-- 10:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:HelSimquia


text:
User talk:VideoBlogger

-- 10:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:VideoBlogger


text:
User talk:Miky87

-- 10:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Miky87


text:
User talk:Naxirisu

-- 10:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Naxirisu


text:
Thread:Comments:Azerbaijan win 2011 Eurovision Song Contest/Israeli portal

This article has nothing to do with the state of Israel. Why is it in the Israeli portal?


text:
User talk:Ganesh.rao

-- 11:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ganesh.rao


text: Comments:Ralph Nader: Obama will likely face challenge in Democratic primaries


text:
Thread:Comments:Azerbaijan win 2011 Eurovision Song Contest/Israeli portal/reply

If you read the article properly, you'll note that Israel compete in Eurovision. Goodness knows why, considering the fact they're, er, not particularly European, but they're there.


text:
User talk:Jigen III

-- 12:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jigen III


text: Talk:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president


text: Comments:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president


text:
User talk:Dfco

-- 12:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dfco


text:
User talk:Slentee

-- 12:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Slentee


text:
User talk:Ranjeet kumar maurya

-- 12:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ranjeet kumar maurya


text:
User talk:Athul lalji

-- 12:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Athul lalji


text:
User talk:Sumanbhumbak

-- 12:36, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sumanbhumbak


text:
United States Government loses AAA credit rating from Standard and Poor's

August 8, 2011

The international credit ratings agency has confirmed that the United States  has had its national credit rating downgraded one full notch from AAA to AA+ in the light of the recent drama concerning the US debt ceiling and the negotiations to have it raised before the August 2 deadline, citing concerns about budget deficits.

In a statement, S&P said that the main reason for the downgrade was that the final deficit reduction bill passed by and the  this Tuesday past were insufficient. The potential at this stage is for the downgrade to raise the cost of borrowing for the US Government in the future. It also stands to have a knock on effect for investor confidence, BBC correspondents claim.

Losing its "Triple A" rating for the first time in history is a significant blow to President Barack Obama, leading a country with enormous debt, unemployment at over 9% and the possibility of another recession to follow.

The is thought to dispute the downgrade. "A judgment flawed by a $2tn error speaks for itself," an unnamed spokesman said, referring to errors anonymously-speaking officials claim to have identified in S&P's maths. China's national state-owned news org  said China has "every right now to demand the United States address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China's dollar assets." The US is more indebted to China than anyone else.

There are no plans at this time for the other two major credit rating agencies, and, to follow S&P's lead.


text:
Thread:Comments:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president/laughable ... not

(1) never held office before ... just what the country needs ... to move from a guy that handed out fliers on street corners to someone with even less executive experience (2) from her article on wiki i cannot find even one minute of college experience ... just what the country needs ... to move from a guy that at least went to Harvard law to a person whose background is no better that a monkey in a cage that throws its feccess


text:
User talk:Djwasim01

-- 12:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Djwasim01


text:
User talk:ALX-Q

-- 13:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:ALX-Q


text:
User talk:Somaford

-- 13:40, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Somaford


text:
User talk:EnglishYard

-- 13:53, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:EnglishYard


text:
User talk:Ramanzamn

-- 13:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ramanzamn


text:
User talk:Dektonk

-- 13:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dektonk


text:
User talk:Thekeralite

-- 14:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thekeralite


text:
User talk:Johnniebm

-- 14:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Johnniebm


text:
User talk:Scriminger

-- 14:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Scriminger


text:
User talk:Cantabwarrior

-- 14:21, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cantabwarrior


text:
User talk:Trottel09

-- 14:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Trottel09


text:
User talk:SalfEnergy

-- 14:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:SalfEnergy


text:
User talk:Jouini med

-- 15:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jouini med


text:
User talk:Vishu27june

-- 15:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vishu27june


text:
Thread:Comments:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president/laughable ... not/reply

This is just making a mockery of the US Presidential system. Her running, not what you said.


text:
User talk:Rijriw98hgirjg

-- 15:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rijriw98hgirjg


text:
User talk:Secretmissionpassion

-- 15:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Secretmissionpassion


text:
User talk:Ronak5059

-- 15:22, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ronak5059


text:
User talk:Жълто и Черно

-- 15:22, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Жълто и Черно


text:
User talk:Alexandlee

-- 15:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alexandlee


text:
User talk:Devendrapatilbp.mech

-- 16:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Devendrapatilbp.mech


text:
User talk:Vdhatterwal

-- 16:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vdhatterwal


text:
User talk:WendyB

-- 16:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:WendyB


text:
User talk:Remont

-- 16:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Remont


text:
User talk:Usmanwardag

-- 16:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Usmanwardag


text:
User talk:Arkhandar

-- 16:40, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Arkhandar


text:
User talk:Alexkumar

-- 16:45, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alexkumar


text:
User talk:Michaelfagua

-- 17:10, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Michaelfagua


text:
User talk:Prometheus8555

-- 17:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Prometheus8555


text:
User talk:Tarobalsool

-- 17:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tarobalsool


text:
User talk:Primasz

-- 17:33, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Primasz


text:
User talk:Thrice43

-- 17:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thrice43


text:
User talk:Gabriel Abucarub

-- 17:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gabriel Abucarub


text:
User talk:Objectivesea2

-- 17:45, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Objectivesea2


text:
User talk:Kaushik 108

-- 17:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kaushik 108


text:
User talk:Jaskul75

-- 17:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jaskul75


text:
User talk:Twoor3

-- 17:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Twoor3


text:
User talk:Josimara R. Alves

-- 17:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Josimara R. Alves


text:
User talk:Rm1271

-- 18:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rm1271


text:
Wikinews:Water cooler/policy/archives/2011/July

ArbCom elections
Here's the proposal (from here):
 * The community must agree on all election procedures by July 1, and election committee members by July 10.
 * The deadline for nominations is 2000 UTC July 17.
 * Voting will take place from 2000 UTC July 18 to 2000 UTC July 30. Questions and comments may be made during that time period.
 * Since the incumbent members' seats expire on August 3th, the election committee will declare the winners on about July 31, and the new term begins after declaration. Should any case be before the arbcom at election time, the current committee continues to sit after turnover on cases that started under the current committee. Any new case after turnover is for the new committee.

This can be a painless process, I believe, if the election committee takes my strong advice to not create a page for "questions for all candidates"; as I elaborated on the above-linked thread, questions for each candidate should be located under that candidate. The creation last year, for the first time, of a page of questions for all candidates resulted in a grossly politicized process for what should be the most profoundly unpolitical of elections. I remember one person remarking early last month (on IRC, maybe?) that if we did that again this year they wouldn't be willing to stand for ArbCom this year.

We need at least two people for the election committee. Volunteers? --Pi zero (talk) 12:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I can if needed, but I'm going to be traveling during the nomination and first few days of the voting periods.  — fetch · comms  15:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

 * I volunteer to join the election committee as well, but I will be busy this weekend, it being a holiday weekend in the US. — Mike moral  ♪♫  05:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Though we have two for the election committee, obviously at least three would be even better :-).

 * There is now a 2011 election page; discussion should probably continue on its talk page. --Pi zero (talk) 22:48, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Review tag
At WN:Reviewing articles it states "To ask for an article to be reviewed should be added to the article.  gets replaced by the review template, once the article has enough information, and has been checked for spelling and grammar errors."

Recently, I've noticed many drive-by additions of review tags (one specifically without the consent of the articles' contributor). The above policy is not clear on who can add a review tag. Should any user be able to add it or just those who made significant contributions to the article? --William S. Saturn (talk) 22:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Tricky. If someone has left a finished-looking article for several hours, there's no good reason not to tag it for review. If they've gone off looking for additional information, they should probably comment to that effect on the talk page. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:14, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a source
Can wikipedia be used as a source for background information? And if so, does it need to be noted under sources or do links in the article suffice? --William S. Saturn (talk) 23:45, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia itself states it is not to be considered a reliable source. However, good Wikipedia articles will refer to reliable sources.
 * A point perhaps more important to know is that Wikipedia's license is not compatible with ours; their content, no matter how well sourced, cannot be imported. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:10, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think a blanket ban on Wikipedia is helpful. The context is vital here. When one simply wishes to point to basic, straightforward facts that any reasonably intelligent person could synthesise, Wikipedia does the job just fine. It's our sister project for a reason. We link to it, and when appropriate, it makes sense to use that. We shouldn't need a source if a few minutes on Wikipedia would allow anyone to deduce simple facts that aren't included in the sources. Imagine Bill Clinton keeled over and died and we were writing an obituary: all the news sources we used to source his obituary pointed out that he was President of the US, but failed to mention that he was Governor of Arkansas before that. When we come to write a story, we should be able to trust Wikipedia to fill a few small gaps between the main sources. —Tom Morris (talk) 00:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Good answer (referring to Brian McNeil) I notice quite a few articles use a Wikipedia article as a source.  Mattisse (talk) 00:21, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I specifically request comment on the discussions on Talk:British painter Lucian Freud dies aged 88 and Talk:Aaron Swartz arrested and charged for downloading JSTOR articles In one case quotes are lifted from a Wikipedia article, one of which is unsourced and the other a statement referring to what another newspaper said from a 2001 BBC article. In the other article, a legal opinion is given as "common knowledge" and therefore the opinion given that it does not need to be sourced. I would like to know what wikinews policy is regarding these practices in articles writing. Thanks, Mattisse (talk) 00:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Lifting from Wikipedia is a violation of their copyright, it is not compatible with that of Wikinews. Stating something as "common knowledge" is dubious in many cases. Two or three clicks from the Bill Clinton article gave a legitimate source for Tom's example. I'd tend towards saying legal opinions aren't common knowledge, they should be sourced to an authority on the law. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * First of all, using Wikipedia as a source isn't a violation of their copyright any more than using BBC News as a source is a violation of their copyright. Using Wikipedia as a source of background knowledge doesn't suddenly mean we are infringing on Wikipedia's copyright when we aren't infringing on the copyright of BBC News when we use them as a source for the current goings-on. One of the ways that Wikinews can provide value is to provide deeper and richer background information (we sure aren't gonna get the story first–Aaron Swartz arrested and charged for downloading JSTOR articles is now overdue a review by 27 hours), and to do that we use Wikipedia as a sort of palimpsest clippings file to put the current news into some kind of useful perspective.
 * So let's not confuse the legal issue with the Wikinews style issue. Now, "legal opinions" is explicitly not what is being provided in the last paragraph of the Aaron Swartz article. I have simply pointed out that the reason the issue has arisen is that the collection of files Gmaxwell has put up on the net are public domain under US law but are not public domain in other jurisdictions. There is controversy about this and that controversy is reflected in the Bridgeman case. The issue is not complicated to understand and doesn't require a Master's degree in intellectual property law to understand: any reasonable person can, upon reading a few paragraphs of the Wikipedia article, see the connection with the Gmaxwell development in the Swartz/JSTOR story. —Tom Morris (talk) 00:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not going to engage in this discussion any longer. You've failed to correctly read what I wrote the first time. Someone else can take a turn at correcting your misunderstanding. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No way, Wikipedia is not a reliable source at all, it's like to use Fox News as one. If you want to use information from Wikipedia, use the sources given in it. アンパロ Io ti odio! 01:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Using Wikipedia as a *source* isn't a copyright violation. Copy and pasting from it is, due to licensing issues. Gopher65talk 01:21, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Using Wikipedia as a source is a violation of Wikinews policy to use only trustworthy sources — because Wikipedia itself says its articles aren't trustworthy.  --Pi zero (talk) 01:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean something like this: "This Service is available "as is." We do not warrant that this Service will be uninterrupted or error-free. There may be delays, omissions, interruptions and inaccuracies in the news, information or other materials available through this Service." - Washington Post. See . —Tom Morris (talk) 06:31, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If you cite Wikipedia, your homework will be marked F-. That a better argument? Or, would the point make more sense were I to say you're daft to cite a source that is not fixed? That anyone can edit? That changes over time?
 * Just do what the rest of us have always done; follow the footnotes, verify the facts in the source Wikipedia uses, and use that as your source instead of being lazy! --07:25, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that we shouldn't be sourcing background information to Wikipedia, for the same reasons WP doesn't use itself as a source. The only exception would be where WP itself is part of the story, and even then I'd try and get a permalink to a specific revision to avoid the problem of later changes. the wub "?!"  11:34, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

This really shouldn't even be controversial (though I've lots of experience with really intelligent people missing the "obvious"; I know, it just... happens). Wikipedia is not fixed and anyone can edit it, so it's common sense you can't trust anything it says unless you verify it in some other, reliable source, and it tells you not to trust anything it says unless you verify it in some other, reliable source. Wandering through the labyrinth of Wikipedia's policies guidelines and essays —it's almost impossible to find these things when you want them, even though they generally are stated clearly and "prominently" if you can figure out where— here's a fairly nice passage from w:WP:CLONE:
 * "Many hoaxes and urban legends have been started on Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia), and many continue to be introduced to this day. In some cases[which?], it has taken several years for the discrepancy to be discovered[citation needed], and by the time the truth was learned, these rumors[which?] had spread to dozens of other sites accessible via a web search."

One of the really profound differences between Wikipedia and Wikinews is that we claim to be reliable (with technical machinery therefor). One of the basic arguments used by Wikipedians in denial about our reliability is that Wikinews is a wiki, and Wikipedia is a wiki, and Wikipedia is fundamentally unreliable, therefore Wikinews must also be fundamentally unreliable. (Kind of like 'flamingos are animals, and elephants are animals, and flamingos are pink, therefore elephants are pink.') --Pi zero (talk) 12:42, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh I agree. I was just saying clarifying that the "licences not compatible" bit only applied to direct copy and pasting, and paraphrasing of Wikipedia. Gopher65talk 13:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The difference is, I don't consider Wikipedia "fundamentally unreliable". I consider it unreliable for some things, but on when Lucian Freud was naturalised as a citizen of the United Kingdom or other such stuff, I've got no reason to doubt it. The immaturity of our attempts to assign sources into "reliable" and "unreliable" boxes is why I finally got around to writing a user essay on Wikipedia this morning: . Wikipedia is reliable enough that you start finding WP articles on the front page of Google News. Given the amount of in the world, for the basic facts I can't say I honestly trust Wikipedia less than anywhere else these days. In fact, I trust it substantially more than approximately the vast majority of British print journalism. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:17, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * True enough, and there's abundant evidence that other press sources use Wikipedia for information: w:Talk:Ronnie_Hazlehurst being a prime example of it going wrong, but most of the time they get away with it. The issue is more one of perception, and that we strive to actually cite our sources. The general public (correctly or incorrectly) consider Wikipedia to not be reliable, in fact WP encourages them to think that. So citing it here passes that perceived unreliability over to us.
 * (I do agree with your essay though that cleanly dividing sources into reliable/unreliable is impossible, and that many Wikipedian rule-driven efforts are doomed to fail) the wub  "?!"  13:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia has the difficult problem that it needs far more rules than a small project, in order to maintain any sort of long-term trend toward order in such a vast collection of material with very large numbers of contributors. Versus the familiar drawbacks and weaknesses of red tape.  They have a dilemma; I sympathize.  Okay, getting back to the issue at hand.

 * The reason to cite a source —on either project— is to allow the reader to judge the trustworthiness of the information. If you don't know where the information came from, you'd be a fool to trust it.  And if we find information in Wikipedia, and we aspire to journalistic integrity, we don't just believe it because it was in Wikipedia, we judge how trustworthy it is based on where Wikipedia got it from.  And we'd be completely non-credible, and rightly so, if we claimed to believe it because we read it in Wikipedia.  We believe it because of our judgement of the source provided by Wikipedia, and therefore that is the source we must list.  Duh, there's judgement involved; it isn't judgement of Wikipedia, it's judgement of the source Wikipedia got it from.

 * Standards are sliding elsewhere. Our value in the world goes up as we maintain our standards while others lose track of the difference between hearsay and news, between opinion and objectivity.  It's irrelevant that these things are not absolutes:  people use the impossibility of perfection as an excuse to not try, and thereby lessen themselves.  --Pi zero (talk) 14:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that the news article was to be written using the sources listed in the aricle, not from the Wikipedia article and not from our own personal knoowledge (unless it is under the "Original reporting" provisio). Am I wrong? Mattisse (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You are exactly right. There is of course the allowance for "common knowledge", but the bar for something to be common knowledge is very high indeed: the standard examples are "Medvedev is President of Russia" and "Paris is in France".  --Pi zero (talk) 16:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

This is Wikinews, we've upped our standards - so up yours! :P --Brian McNeil / talk 18:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Lol. We may be better off sticking with "Facts don't cease to be facts, but news ceases to be news." :-)  --Pi zero (talk) 18:17, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

How can incorrectly sourced article be published?
See Talk:British painter Lucian Freud dies aged 88. None of the problems were rectified before publication. Mattisse (talk) 22:21, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

What is OR reporting on wikinews?
See Talk:At least 85 dead in shooting at Norwegian youth camp. Wikipedia, which supposedly has lower standards than wikinews, would never accept a machine translation as valid, and Google translations are notoriously poor. Also, drawing conclusions from a primary source, and turning them into a secondary source would never be tolerated on Wikipedia. How can this be OK for wikinews. It is one wikinews editor's unverified opinion of what the facts are. What gives? Mattisse (talk) 22:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's, um, the whole point of OR... We take primary sources and interpret them. That's what original reporting is. We allow it, and Wikipedia doesn't - that's why they wouldn't accept it while we do. The machine translation suffices for the short phrases that were used in the article, and is necessary since I'm not aware of anybody on enWikinews who speaks Norwegian. DEN  DODGE  George Watson  22:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * But not reporter's notes were published. And machine translations would never be accepted by a reputable news organization. So I can take any primary source, such as scientific journal articles, and interpret them as I wish? With no oversight? Piss poor, in my opinion, as that is what poor journalism is. Mattisse (talk) 22:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In this case, it is brief enough phrases to be acceptable and thus labelling it as "piss poor" is unreasonably harsh. When you have experience of working on Original Reporting, then you might be in a position to level such criticism. --Brian McNeil / talk 22:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I have had experience Original reporting on real newspapers, hence I know what it is like to try to get material through an editor without two independent sources, if the two independent sources are primary, i.e. quotes from two unrelated persons in the story. I have sat all night in motel rooms at the site of the icident, waiting for various calls from editors as to what was needed to makes the story publishable. The editor has to go to his editor, ectc. Wikinews seems naive to me. Mattisse (talk) 23:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I somewhat agree with Mattisse. How can a reviewer verify that the writer did not misinterpret the television report?--William S. Saturn (talk) 22:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. At a minimun, he should place on the article Talk page his reporter's notes, his transcript of the conversation if he recorded it, just like a real newspaper reporter would be required to produce for his editor. Or the notes he took during the interview if he did not record it.  Otherwise, anyone could unwittingly misinterpret the facts, if there is no editor or second person to verify. I am stunned that one person can interpret a situation and publish it with no verification. Certainly you know Wikipedia would never condone such laxity. Google is not a reliable translator of material. It is a machine translation. Mattisse (talk) 23:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I was clearly negligent. As it is evident tha tI no longer have the trust of the community, I shall stand for reconfirmation of my accredited reporter status. Would you like me to do the same for my reviewer right while I'm at it, since I clearly have no idea what I'm doing? DEN  DODGE  George Watson  23:34, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't care. Probably wouldn't be fair if you do it, as I see unprofessional reporting all the time on wikinews. I have read enough articles on wikinews to realize that this is a perversive problem, and so you should probably not be the only one to take the fall for it. In my opinion, wikinews needs to clean up it's act. Mattisse (talk) 23:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I've done it anyway (here). If any significant concerns about the quality of my original reporting are raised, I feel it is only right to reaffirm that I still have the trust of the community. DEN  DODGE  George Watson  00:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That seems to be a bit of an overreaction. Furthermore, I do not believe the article is original research. The information you gathered was from the eyewitness reports of other organizations; you were only relaying the information. And of course, there's nothing wrong with that though it may be difficult for a reviewer to confirm.--William S. Saturn (talk) 00:17, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Serious concerns were raised, and I want to verify that I am still trusted. That's not an overreaction. The only part I listed as OR was the stuff from Document.no, which is a primary source. Similar things have been treated as OR in the past, and I was not aware of any change in policy. A lot of WN's practices are unwritten, and I may well be mistaken, but that is how I understand it. The same three people arguing over this isn;t going to get anything done, so I'm going to wait until someone previously uninvolved comes along before I add more fuel to the fire. I have a My Little Pony fanfic to write and sleep to catch up on in the meantime. DEN  DODGE  George Watson  00:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

 * (edit conflict. Not to blame User talk:Dendodge overly, a I have noticed many articles following this practice, with no reportor notes on the talk page. I suggesr that wikinews needs to make it's policy clear. In an "real" newspaper, any "orignal sources" need to be verified by others saying essentially the same thing. The decision to publish goes up a chain of editors. Never it is up to the original writer of the article to decided completely, not even in an editorial. Wikinews needs to clean up its act, in my opinion. Because I write synthesized articles, every source is checked to a "t", but under the guise of "OR" reporting, there seems to be no fact checking. The OR report can write whatever his interpretation of the event is with no verification. And without transcripts, or at the very least, reporters notes taken "in vivo", how can this be checked? Mattisse (talk) 00:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Iirc, inadequate reporter's notes on broadcast reports is a pet peeve of Blood Red Sandman's (who is not now here to correct me :-). I agree with xem: broadcast reporting is OR and therefore requires detailed reporter's notes on the talk page.

 * Responsibility for this laxness falls on reviewers as well, for allowing such things to pass with inadequate reporter's notes. --Pi zero (talk) 01:30, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Most of the time, our broadcast notes consist of nothing more than "I watched BBC News." I listed each piece of information that came from that source, and elaborated slightly on the details, for each and every piece of information I took from the source. It was a fast-moving story, our article was already a number of hours behind everyone else, and I had no help whatsoever. If I had taken notes of every single thing that was said, I'd probably still be writing it now. Full OR notes for everything would be awesome, but the ones I gave were a hell of a lot better than the ones we usually get, and a decent compromise between verifiability and getting the news out before it ceases to be news. DEN  DODGE  George Watson  01:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're quite right. You did well, and I apologize for any suggestion otherwise on my part.  --Pi zero (talk) 02:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Apology to all
I deeply apologize to one and all for "the bad atmosphere created by Mattisse's comments", as represented by this characterization of my use of the phrase "piss poor". I used a poor choice of words in a comment I made intended to suggest an improvement to  wikinews. I very much regret it. I hope I will be forgiven. Best wishes, Mattisse (talk) 13:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Saul Tschekhrinowitz

-- 19:42, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Saul Tschekhrinowitz


text:
User talk:Alkan dzafce

-- 19:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alkan dzafce


text:
User talk:Brra51

-- 19:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Brra51


text:
User talk:Prat Joulou

-- 19:53, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Prat Joulou


text:
User talk:Abinfocom

-- 20:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

Your recent contributions are considered to be spam and have been reverted or deleted. Should you believe that your contributions are not spam, please argue your case on your talk page, or in WN:ALERT.

Further spamming may result in your editing privileges being removed. Please contribute to Wikinews in a constructive fashion instead. Pi zero (talk) 22:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Abinfocom


text:
User talk:MusicologoVzla

-- 20:19, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:MusicologoVzla


text:
User talk:Vikianu

-- 20:25, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vikianu


text:
User talk:Joseph.Petrelli

-- 20:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Joseph.Petrelli


text:
User talk:Bernard van der Wees

-- 20:40, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bernard van der Wees


text:
User talk:Homing97

-- 20:45, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Homing97


text: Comments:Paul the 'psychic' octopus who correctly predicted World Cup results dies


text:
Thread:Comments:Paul the 'psychic' octopus who correctly predicted World Cup results dies/Comments from feedback form - "very poor"

very poor —41.139.43.140 (talk) 20:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Vmixx

-- 20:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vmixx


text:
User talk:Indexcard88

-- 21:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Indexcard88


text:
User talk:Creep1959

-- 21:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Creep1959


text:
User talk:Krlitoz10ful

-- 21:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Krlitoz10ful


text:
User talk:Echoswolf

-- 22:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Echoswolf


text:
User talk:Aubaskar

-- 22:22, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aubaskar


text:
User talk:Alphius

-- 22:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alphius


text:
User talk:CopKiller

-- 22:42, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:CopKiller


text:
User talk:Rowanmilkman

-- 22:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rowanmilkman


text:
User talk:Ahmed audi

-- 23:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ahmed audi


text:
User talk:Danoblivion

-- 23:10, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Danoblivion


text:
User talk:Sensei Montoya

-- 23:22, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sensei Montoya


text:
User talk:Geoffjw1978

-- 23:22, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Geoffjw1978


text:
User talk:PoincareHenri

-- 23:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:PoincareHenri


text:
User talk:Damm2600

-- 23:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Damm2600


text:
User talk:Santasa99

-- 23:53, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Santasa99


text:
User talk:Deerileyhammond

-- 00:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Deerileyhammond


text:
User talk:MunichAmerican

-- 00:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:MunichAmerican


text:
User talk:Janai

-- 00:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Anti-corruption bill sparks protests in Jordan
There were significant problems with the current form of the article. I tried to compile as complete a list of problems as I could.

Please take a look at my review comments, and. --Pi zero (talk) 13:42, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedians to the Games
Hi. :) As you're an Australian contributor, I thought you might be interested in Wikimedians to the Games, which is an opportunity to cover the Paralympic Games as a member of the press. As you've experience writing Wikinews articles, this should give you a leg up. :)  LauraHale (talk) 08:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Janai


text:
Thread:Comments:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president/laughable ... not/reply (2)

Wow, elitism much? Didn't go to college? Abe Lincoln didn't. Hasn't held office? George Washington hadn't.

That being said, this would be awful for America. 204.116.109.80 (talk) 00:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Demarda

-- 01:10, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Demarda


text:
User talk:CritianU.

-- 01:40, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:CritianU.


text:
User talk:Nucuoitruocgio

-- 01:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nucuoitruocgio


text:
User talk:Alanhalo777

-- 01:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alanhalo777


text:
User talk:Pun Rojanamontien

-- 01:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pun Rojanamontien


text:
Comments:Mothers around the world on Mother's Day

I wish all mothers ,grandmothers in the world healthy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pun Rojanamontien (talk • contribs) 01:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * They're gonna be happy ^^ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JoanaCarv (talk • contribs) 08:16, 18 September 2017 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Ñamfrifrufi

-- 01:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ñamfrifrufi


text:
User talk:Dilanmoreno29

-- 02:04, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dilanmoreno29


text:
User talk:Iakld

-- 02:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Iakld


text:
User talk:Salurich

-- 02:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Salurich


text:
User talk:Flsaisalie

-- 02:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Flsaisalie


text:
User talk:Rinamon

-- 03:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rinamon


text:
User talk:Chisophugis

-- 03:08, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Chisophugis


text:
User talk:Yoki962k

-- 03:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yoki962k


text:
User talk:Sengokucannon

-- 03:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sengokucannon


text:
User talk:Wedus

-- 03:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Wedus


text:
User talk:BlueAlertUs

-- 03:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:BlueAlertUs


text:
User talk:Rrrayito

-- 03:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rrrayito


text:
User talk:DINESHRAJU

-- 03:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:DINESHRAJU


text:
User talk:Aboalfazlemail

-- 04:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aboalfazlemail


text:
User talk:EarthShocker

-- 04:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:EarthShocker


text:
User:EarthShocker

Hi everybody!

title: User:EarthShocker


text:
User talk:Kurkov v

-- 04:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kurkov v


text:
User talk:DoItForTheLulz

-- 04:41, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:DoItForTheLulz


text:
User talk:Dibyajeet

-- 04:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dibyajeet


text:
User talk:Delaywaves

-- 04:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Delaywaves


text:
User talk:Thelonelyleper

-- 05:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thelonelyleper


text:
User talk:Nandim3

-- 05:17, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nandim3


text:
User talk:Ninaeva

-- 05:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ninaeva


text:
User talk:ДЯДЯ

-- 05:50, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:ДЯДЯ


text:
User talk:Heroesgallary

-- 06:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Heroesgallary


text:
Talk:Wikinews interviews Andy Martin, U.S. Republican Party presidential candidate

Remark
Excellent enjoyable and useful review Will Saturn thanks I repeat an earlier question to Wikinews followers will no one but myself use the star ratings to report our view of the work and journalistic factors?--Robbygay (talk) 01:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Zsgoldberg

-- 06:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Zsgoldberg


text:
User talk:Ashcan.s

-- 06:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ashcan.s


text:
User talk:Muhammad Ciit

-- 06:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Muhammad Ciit


text:
User talk:Supermæn

-- 06:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Supermæn


text:
User talk:Yacinexm

-- 06:58, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yacinexm


text:
User talk:Rjkarthick

-- 07:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rjkarthick


text:
User talk:Somerty

-- 07:08, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Somerty


text:
User talk:Davideyles

-- 07:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Davideyles


text:
User talk:Meysam.ebrahimi

-- 07:46, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Meysam.ebrahimi


text:
User talk:Люленчик

-- 07:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Люленчик


text:
User talk:Sado11

-- 08:04, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sado11


text:
User talk:Psdhar2004

-- 08:10, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Psdhar2004


text:
User talk:أسامة العنزي

-- 08:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:أسامة العنزي


text:
User talk:Mggacollege

-- 08:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mggacollege


text:
User talk:Jud.MJ

-- 08:41, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jud.MJ


text:
User talk:Yasmen.farid

-- 08:46, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yasmen.farid


text:
User talk:Shukzz

-- 08:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shukzz


text:
User talk:Benedickt

-- 09:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Benedickt


text:
User talk:Solitarygoat

-- 09:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Solitarygoat


text:
User talk:Savethesunflower

-- 09:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Savethesunflower


text:
Thread:Comments:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president/Comments from feedback form - "are you kidding with this nutc..."

are you kidding with this nutcase?


text:
User talk:AlirezaM

-- 10:00, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:AlirezaM


text:
User talk:Gollibolli

-- 10:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gollibolli


text:
User talk:Janjaap33

-- 10:15, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Janjaap33


text:
User talk:Paulxuacu

-- 10:16, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Paulxuacu


text:
User talk:Dr varsha balraj

-- 10:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dr varsha balraj


text:
Thread:Comments:Ralph Nader: Obama will likely face challenge in Democratic primaries/Obama?

Why Obama want to do that? Just for being the president again? It may hurt the people which support he.


text:
User talk:Solomon203

-- 10:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Solomon203


text:
User talk:Roopak mayya

-- 10:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Roopak mayya


text:
User talk:Mucalculus

-- 10:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mucalculus


text:
User talk:Akanshya Jena

-- 11:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Akanshya Jena


text:
Thread:Comments:Air France, pilots union, victims group criticise transatlantic disaster probe/AF269

Kind of reminds me of back in 1988. It was a test flight for the new A320. The aircraft was to fly low in a very slow nose-up position along a runway at an airshow before climbing again; but at the end of the runway was a forest. The pilot tried to speed up but wasn't quick enough, and it crashed. The investigators blamed the pilot, who survived, but he said there was a flaw with the aircraft's engines which meant they didn't respond quickly enough. I've never been sure myself.


text:
User talk:Ninney

-- 11:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Disruption
Looking over your contributions, I feel the need to point out that placing articles up for review without even attempting to fix the issues raised in failing review is considered disruptive. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ninney


text:
User talk:Znamenamir

-- 11:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Znamenamir


text:
User talk:Asdasd25

-- 11:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Asdasd25


text:
User talk:SUDIKKO

-- 11:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:SUDIKKO


text:
Thread:Comments:Air France, pilots union, victims group criticise transatlantic disaster probe/AF269/reply

I'm glad someone else is making this connection. For me, the key point was at the pilot's trial when it became apparent the flight recorders had been tampered with; bluntly, that they likely hadn't come from the accident aircraft at all.

The other clear connection I'm making is to allegations made during the Concorde trial. Less certain on that, but I'm feeling there's an unknown something missing from that story. That missing gear spacer (which made the aircraft veer on the runway) is such a huge coincidence if unconnected, but that would imply all the stuff with the metal strip was instead a coincidence... Hard to swallow either of those, for me.


text:
User talk:Marthelati

-- 12:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Marthelati


text:
User talk:DPBT1

-- 12:11, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:DPBT1


text:
User talk:Rdm487

-- 12:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rdm487


text:
Thread:Comments:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president/laughable ... not/reply (3)

To be honest, both Lincoln and Washington lived in VERY different times. You cannot compare their experience and education with what is expected now. Lincoln is defined by the American civil war, and Washington rose to prominence thanks to the American revolutionary war. Both led a fledgling nation that was not yet a prominent player in international politics. Both were leaders during wartime on American soil. (Yes, I know that the war was over by the time Washington became president.)

Lincoln led during a crisis that threatened the existence of the USA, and Washington led during and after a revolution, a most important time during the formation of any country.

Compare that with the rather agressive superstate the current presidents will have to lead.

I sincerely hope the American people will vote for experienced and educated men or women to lead the USA, and to be their local representatives as well.


text:
User talk:RavinJoe

-- 12:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:RavinJoe


text:
User talk:HansNZL

-- 12:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:HansNZL


text:
User talk:Alescio

-- 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alescio


text:
User talk:Preethamchandra

-- 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Preethamchandra


text:
User talk:Sharkymikey

-- 12:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sharkymikey


text:
User talk:Edwinzhang1115

-- 13:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Edwinzhang1115


text:
User talk:Bluenosepiperflyer

-- 13:04, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bluenosepiperflyer


text:
User talk:Sreesanthkumarkv

-- 13:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sreesanthkumarkv


text:
User talk:As-Athu

-- 13:10, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:As-Athu


text:
User talk:Casualty00

-- 13:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Casualty00


text:
User talk:Mauroalexander

-- 13:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mauroalexander


text:
User talk:Brattsy

-- 13:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Brattsy


text:
User talk:JacobUOW

-- 13:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedians to the Games
Hi. :) As you're an Australian contributor, I thought you might be interested in Wikimedians to the Games, which is an opportunity to cover the Paralympic Games as a member of the press. As you've experience writing Wikinews articles, this should give you a leg up. :)  LauraHale (talk) 08:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:JacobUOW


text:
User talk:Mrs.Everest

-- 13:41, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mrs.Everest


text:
User talk:Concepta Gunning

-- 14:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Concepta Gunning


text:
User talk:KapilFaujdar

-- 14:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:KapilFaujdar


text:
User talk:Aarif333

-- 14:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aarif333


text:
User:Ninney

 * ==== About me ====

The first thing I check online is Wikipedia for past 7 years.

Polymath, Omniscient but still a student of life .....

Astronomy
Being an Amateur Astronomer, nothing seems to me so pleasing then spending a night beneath the sky …..

Books
●๋• ι ℓσνє яєα∂ιηg вσσкѕ ●๋•

Bibliophile (Lover or collector of books.)

Just what I need, more books.

I devour Classic Romances especially Victorian times. Highly recommended.

I liked Jane Austen's "Pride & Prejudice" the best, even though it was a bit romantic. There were lots of laugh out loud moments & few tense. But Eliza, the protagonist, showed her best. She even stole my heart. My favourite fish (Gold Fish) in my home aquarium (fish tank) is named after her.

English
The language I love the most.

English is a funny language; that explains why we park our car on the driveway and drive our car on the parkway.

It's a strange world of language in which skating on thin ice can get you into hot water.

History
This day that year.

If you want to understand today, you have to search yesterday.

History is a kind of introduction to more interesting people than we can possibly meet in our restricted lives; let us not neglect the opportunity.

& least I can say is History is Herstory, too …

Quest of knowledge
Though I know that, all our knowledge merely helps us to die a more painful death than animals that know nothing. Animals have these advantages over man: they never hear the clock strike, they die without any idea of death, they have no theologians to instruct them, their last moments are not disturbed by unwelcome and unpleasant ceremonies, their funerals cost them nothing, and no one starts lawsuits over their wills.

{| valign="top" class="toccolours"
 * Check the following links
 * Google : My Google Profile
 * Facebook : My Facebook Profile
 * GoodReads : My Goodreads Profile
 * Facebook : My Facebook Profile
 * GoodReads : My Goodreads Profile

title: User:Ninney


text:
User talk:Luucongkinh

-- 14:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Luucongkinh


text:
User talk:JayS2709

-- 15:00, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:JayS2709


text:
User talk:Karthiksperla

-- 15:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Karthiksperla


text:
38 killed after US helicopter crashes in Afghanistan

August 7, 2011

38 people were killed on Saturday when a US crashed west of Kabul, Afghanistan, with the Taliban claiming responsibility for the crash.

Thirty Americans were killed in the crash, including at least seventeen members of, Air Force members, the helicopter's crew, a dog handler and a civilian interpreter, while eight members of the Afghan Army were also on board and died.

According to witnesses, members of the Taliban and officials from the US and Afghanistan, the Chinook was deliberately targeted, apparently by a  (RPG). While no American officials have spoken on the record about the cause of the crash, anonymous sources have said that the helicopter was shot down, an assertion that corresponds with reports from local officials and witness, who said that the helicopter crashed after a rocket struck it.

The Taliban said that they had brought the aircraft down while it was involved in an operation targeting a house where insurgents were meeting. While Taliban forces do not have a history of shooting down aircraft, they claim to have modified their RPGs for improved accuracy, but there is no proof of this.

The chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral, warned against leaping to conclusions, however, saying that "[i]nformation is still coming in about this incident. I think it's important that we allow investigators to do their work before jumping to too many conclusions."

President Barack Obama issued a statement after the incident, saying that "[t]heir deaths are a reminder of the extraordinary sacrifices made by the men and women of our military and their families, including all who have served in Afghanistan."


text:
User talk:TheBigBang0

-- 15:25, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:TheBigBang0


text:
User talk:Tondenh

-- 15:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tondenh


text:
User talk:Jairo9super4

-- 15:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jairo9super4


text: Talk:38 killed after US helicopter crashes in Afghanistan


text: Comments:38 killed after US helicopter crashes in Afghanistan


text:
User talk:Biki1122

-- 15:51, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Biki1122


text:
User talk:Badrishw

-- 15:59, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Badrishw


text:
User talk:Mayiraj4u

-- 16:19, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mayiraj4u


text:
User talk:Indromistry

-- 16:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Indromistry


text:
User talk:Calusarul

-- 16:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Croatia joins the European Union
Hi. Croatia joins the European Union is not going to pass the review process at this stage because the article is only one paragraph long, and at this point, the news is about 5 days old. There are other stylistic problems that also needed to be addressed. English Wikinews uses relative dating. We do not say on July 5, 2013. We say Today. New sources about a joining the EU news from the past 2 days and events that happened in the past 48 hours would need to be the vocal event. Mock example: "Having officially joined the European Union at midnight on Monday, Croatians are beginning to feel the impact of this as the week as they fill out visa applications and try to travel to Russia. It has caused delays at airports." Something like that. --LauraHale (talk) 15:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. I clicked that button "by mistake":I wanted to see how it works. I'm snooping around to see what cool stuff you have here on the English wikinews that have not yet been implemented on the Romanian one. Once again, I'm sorry for bothering you. Calusarul (talk) 15:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Those 'submit' buttons are really tempting, aren't they. :-) --Pi zero (talk) 15:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed they are :D I thought there would be a "confirm message". There wasn't. And Laura is very fast... like Usain Bolt of wikinews... like Speedy Gonzales. Calusarul (talk) 16:00, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * An interesting thought. We could add a confirmation step to that button.
 * The thing is, we're in the process of completely revamping the way we handle javascript customizations, like the 'submit' button. The current submit button is a code patch spliced into MediaWiki:Common.js.  When we're done with the upgrade, custom code for things like that will be in entirely different files, so adding more of them won't increase the size of Common.js.  How long the upgrade will take is the big question.  Parts of the upgrade should be on-line soon; but it's a big, sprawling upgrade, and parts of it could take much longer.  --Pi zero (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Moldovan Communist MPs block session with electric megaphone siren
I did my best to source-check based on the sources provided. It's really satisfying when we can manage to get an article like this through review; when we do, we can sometimes partly scoop the English-language mainstream media. But I finally had to admit, I would need some sort of help to cope with the translation problem. See my review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 04:05, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I gave you some explanation below your review. Thanks for your effort and you can ask me further questions on that article if you will. Calusarul (talk) 14:59, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Moldovan premier invites Romanian counterpart to pipeline start
Hi. I encountered verification problems during source-check. Hopefully we can eventually establish a smooth process for these sorts of articles, but we have a way to go yet. See my review comments and . --Pi zero (talk) 15:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Remember to resubmit the article for review when you're ready for it to be re-reviewed! --Pi zero (talk) 17:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Published. Congratulations.  And I think you underestimate how interesting this story is to others around here besides me.

 * I did have a problem with a significant detail I was unable to verify from the sources, which is why at the end of the review I renamed the article. Review comments.  --Pi zero (talk) 05:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, the phrase "energy independence" was in an article, but I probably forgot to mention the source article. And I can't find that article now, but it's ok the way you put it. Anyway, Moldova does get its gas from the Russian Federation and diversifying its sources contributes to its economical independence. Personally, I read news for my own pleasure, not especially for turning them into articles on wikinews, and I'm not always aware of all cultural differences. But I've just got an idea: next time I write an article, I'll imagine I write it for an Australian who has never heard of the subject I write about. Or a Martian.
 * Well, thanks for all your help. I lost my confidence when you lost yours. Also because you "reject" an article before I can outsource all the issues. Wouldn't it be better if you addressed all the issues to me, let me answer and then you make the review? So that I wouldn't have to re-re-resubmit it for review.
 * Thank you very much for all your help. Hope we can collaborate some other time too. Calusarul (talk) 09:22, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

 * It's a cool article, and it's now been published, so it's listed on Google News. Don't take a not-ready so much to heart.  It's called "not ready" rather than "reject" or "fail" or some such negative thing, because it only means that the article is not yet ready to publish.  --Pi zero (talk) 12:12, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I learned how to read before I went to school, when I was 5-6 years old, by reading newspapers. I think I've already read thousands of newspapers articles by now. And I often make connections to articles I read a year or more before. If Dostoevsky were published in newspapers, I would have read all his novels by now :P I'm not a perfect amateur journalist, but I'm a good newspapers reader.
 * Regardless of anything, tell me, is an "abortion pill" the same as a "morning-after pill"? I was reading an article about abortion in Ireland and I don't know what they mean by "abortion pill". Calusarul (talk) 12:50, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

"Abortion pill" can refer to any pill that causes abortion; it's one of the medical technologies for performing abortions. Whether or not a morning-after pill counts as an abortion pill may depend on where the speaker sits on the spectrum between anti-abortion activist and pro-abortion-rights activist. It's of some interest to see what en.wp has to say about it: abortion pill. --Pi zero (talk) 13:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... say in Ireland "75% of women believed the morning-after pill should be an over-the-counter (OTC) drug, as opposed to a prescription drug". Well, at least birth-control pills are legal even if they are hard to find. Calusarul (talk) 14:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Congrats on getting Moldovan premier invites Romanian counterpart to pipeline start published. :D
Congrats on getting the article published. :D I thought it deserved a little recognition so I tweeted about it from The Wikinewsie Group Twitter account and on my own Facebook page. Please continue to contribute because your topic area deserves additional coverage. :) There is so little of that reporting in the English language media. (I read the AP newswire rather obsessively.)  Good to see that we have some one who can do it. :) Keep up the good work. --LauraHale (talk) 13:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll try and write more, but I won't be able to do it without Pi zero's help. My first article - hurray! "It's not right, but it's OK, I'm gonna make it anyway" I'll open a beer can for that. Cheers! Calusarul (talk) 14:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Do no worry too much about not getting every article. I "lost" my first story.  I have probably "lost" another 5 to 10 stories while getting about 180 total published.  It is part of the learning process. :)  And it is really good that you and pi zero have a good reporter, reviewer relationship. :)  That sort of collaboration really is what keeps the quality at Wikinews high. :) --LauraHale (talk) 14:51, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Navalny conviction draws criticism
Worked on your request for an article focusing on the criticism of Navalny's imprisonment as "purely political". Navalny_conviction_draw_criticisms Zeffydragon (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks. I think it's a good topic, but pretty delicate and should be handled carefully. Don't forget to mention that Navalny won't be eligible for any public position in the Russian Federation ("According to a law passed by the Kremlin in 2012, someone who has been convicted of a crime cannot run for public office." Der Spiegel) and listen to Pi zero's advice. Good luck with this articles and others to come. Calusarul (talk) 00:25, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Did follow Pi Zero's very helpful advice. Mentioned something to that effect (re: no russian federation position.). May ellaborate further on this later this evening. Many thanks :) Zeffydragon (talk) 03:05, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Assistance with understanding how much original reporting costs
Hello and I apologize for writing in English. As all language Wikinews improves, The Wikinewsie Group wants to be able better support original reporting done by contributors like you. One of our newsletters at The Wikinewsie Group/Newsletter said you have recently published an original report. This is why I am contacting you.

Members of the The Wikinewsie Group are trying to assess the costs associated with original reporting across all Wikinews projects. This way, we can determine how much original reporting currently costs, who is paying for it, what Wikinews and other projects get for these costs (especially when paid for by unpaid, volunteer contributor reporters). This information can then be used in applying for grants, measuring the success of Wikinews original reporting and seeing how reporters can be better supported. If you could complete this survey on that topic, we would very much appreciate it. We will try to anonymize the responses as best possible when writing up any report. Thank you very much for taking the time to fill it out (especially in English). Please do not hesitate to ask me or pi zero about any questions you may have about this research. We hope the results will enable us to better assist you in conducting more original reporting on Wikinews. --LauraHale (talk) 08:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

title: User talk:Calusarul


text:
User talk:Eyalraz3

-- 16:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Eyalraz3


text:
User talk:Srihariteja

-- 17:10, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Srihariteja


text:
User talk:Aditi1993

-- 17:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aditi1993


text:
User talk:Leon rey

-- 17:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Leon rey


text:
User talk:FootballIsTheBestSportEver

-- 17:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:FootballIsTheBestSportEver


text:
User talk:Jvalienforce

-- 17:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jvalienforce


text:
User talk:9lives

-- 17:40, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:9lives


text:
User talk:Ruwolf

-- 17:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ruwolf


text:
User talk:Panandji

-- 17:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Panandji


text:
User talk:Mboero

-- 17:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mboero


text:
Hugh Carey, former New York Governor, dies aged 92

August 8, 2011

Former of New York  has died at the age of 92. Carey was the 51st governor of the state and held office from 1975 until 1982 as a Democrat. During his tenure he held more power over the finances of than any other governor, before or after Carey's term. He saw the city through the.

The office of current governor announced the death. In a statement, Cuomo said “Governor Carey led our state during a time of great financial turmoil and pulled us back from the brink of bankruptcy and economic ruin.”

Carey ran for Governor during the after being urged by his wife Helen. Helen was battling cancer and died 18 days before Carey announced his intentions to run. During his first year in office, the state was in a financial crisis and banks had stopped giving the city access to credit due to a $5 billion deficit. He managed to come to a agreement with the bankers that heavy spending cuts needed to be made.

Carey was a father of 14 children and grandfather to 25. His is survived by 11 of his children. Two of his sons died in a car accident in 1969. Another son, became a commissioner for the Securities Exchange Commission and died in 2001 after a battle with cancer.


text:
User talk:Іщук Світлана Олексіївна

-- 18:00, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Іщук Світлана Олексіївна


text:
User talk:ChrisSalty

-- 18:17, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:ChrisSalty


text:
User talk:Plasma east

-- 18:19, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Plasma east


text:
User talk:Georgiana02

-- 18:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Georgiana02


text:
User talk:جوادطلسچي

-- 18:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:جوادطلسچي


text:
User talk:Ivoice

-- 18:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ivoice


text:
User talk:Mercedesadobato

-- 18:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mercedesadobato


text:
User talk:Balista gustavo

-- 18:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Balista gustavo


text:
User talk:Samuel9701

-- 18:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Samuel9701


text:
User talk:Angelenoc

-- 19:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Angelenoc


text:
Category:UoW student (Spring 2011)

This is an internal Wikinews category for tracking the work of Professor David Blackall of the University of Wollongong's students, in the 2011 Spring Session (July–November).

Are you one of Prof Blackall's students in Spring Session 2011? If so, please edit your user page and append.

Good luck in getting work published here for course credit; please take the time to read the automatically-posted welcome message on your discussion page – particularly the essay on formulating an article – and consider that the highest quality work on Wikinews is generally far beyond a simple rewrite of wire reports.

__HIDDENCAT__

title: Category:UoW student (Spring 2011)


text:
User talk:Spidey665

-- 19:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Spidey665


text:
User talk:X-Maax

-- 19:31, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:X-Maax


text:
User:JacobUOW

Hey! My name is Jacob and I am studying Journalism at the University of Wollongong. I hope to use wikinews as a method to strengthen my skills in writing, and hope wikinews will use me to get unbiased, accurate news out into the world!

title: User:JacobUOW


text: User:Delphickuow

title: User:Delphickuow


text:
User talk:Waithamai

-- 19:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Waithamai


text:
User:Lizzie.uow

I am a first year journalism student at the University of Wollongong currently enrolled in Spring Session.

title: User:Lizzie.uow


text:
User:Fod724UOW

I am a Bachelor of Journalism student at the University of Wollongong. Looking forward to collaboration with the Wiki reviewers.

title: User:Fod724UOW


text:
User:AKinnearUOW

Journalism Student at The University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia

title: User:AKinnearUOW


text:
User:HainesUOW

Journalism Student at the University of Wollongong.

title: User:HainesUOW


text: User:SamanthaUOW

title: User:SamanthaUOW


text:
Boeing rolls out first 787 Dreamliner to go into service

August 8, 2011

Three years after it was first due for delivery, Boeing has rolled out the first that is to be delivered to a customer. Japan's (ANA) were to take delivery in May 2008, but will now receive the aircraft next month.

The plane promises increased fuel efficiency as it is the first model to be built out of plastic and carbon composites, more lightweight than conventional materials. Boeing says they have 800 orders at 200 million per aircraft. Launch customer ANA have ordered 55.

Delayed by Boeing's outsourcing system to a variety of subcontractors, two models have been developed. The 787-8 holds between 210 and 250 passengers; the 787-9 holds 250 to 290. Airlines choose the seating layout they want.

After the 787, already bearing ANA's livery, arrives in Tokyo next month, the airline will use its first commercial flight for a special charter from Tokyo to Hong Kong. "We plan to use the 787 to expand our business, particularly our international routes," says ANA senior vice president Mitsuo Morimoto. "We plan to increase our revenue from international route significantly and the 787 will play an instrumental role in this," he adds, noting flights to Europe or the US are possibles for 787s.

"We are rolling out the first delivery airplane, the first 787," enthused Scott Fancher, 787 project manager and Boeing vice president. "That's an amazing thing for those who have worked on the program five, six, seven years, here at Boeing and our partners around the world."

Boeing says they must increase the tempo of production from two a month to ten, if they are to meet customer demand. "It's an extraordinary challenge, no one has ever built a wide body aircraft at the rate of 10 per month before," claims  writer John Ostrower.


text:
User talk:Sanghaili

-- 20:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sanghaili


text:
User talk:Dalai lama ding dong

-- 20:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dalai lama ding dong


text:
User talk:Shagunakarsh

-- 20:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shagunakarsh


text:
User talk:Demohio

-- 20:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Demohio


text:
User talk:Antbofh

-- 21:04, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Antbofh


text:
User talk:Ashish-k

-- 21:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ashish-k


text:
User talk:Jlorenzw

-- 21:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jlorenzw


text:
User talk:Joseubina

-- 21:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Joseubina


text:
User talk:Ness BS

-- 21:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ness BS


text:
User talk:Harjetoal

-- 21:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Harjetoal


text:
User talk:Dany17

-- 21:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dany17


text:
User talk:Bushwoman

-- 22:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bushwoman


text:
User talk:Worldresident

-- 22:50, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Worldresident


text:
User talk:Balestrano

-- 22:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Balestrano


text:
User talk:Uowakm

-- 22:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedians to the Games
Hi. :) As you're an Australian contributor, I thought you might be interested in Wikimedians to the Games, which is an opportunity to cover the Paralympic Games as a member of the press. As you've experience writing Wikinews articles, this should give you a leg up. :)  LauraHale (talk) 08:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Uowakm


text:
User talk:Heristedigimde

-- 23:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Heristedigimde


text:
User talk:Buchstapler

-- 23:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Buchstapler


text:
Thread:Comments:Hidden treasure worth billions of dollars discovered in Indian temple/Comments from feedback form - "Well try more........... My be..."

Well try more........... My best Wishes

SNK


text:
User talk:Latif Rahoo

-- 23:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Latif Rahoo


text:
User talk:Emmasylvania

-- 23:31, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Emmasylvania


text: Comments:Tulsi Award for Jagadguru Rambhadracharya on Tulsi Jayanti


text:
Thread:Comments:Tulsi Award for Jagadguru Rambhadracharya on Tulsi Jayanti/Comments from feedback form - "If one has no knowledge of the..."

If one has no knowledge of the subject there are no references to check the cklaims, hence my reliability rating. Neutrality is served in the "is believed" placement. —Robbygay (talk) 23:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


text:
User talk:ILikeEatingPie

-- 23:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:ILikeEatingPie


text:
User talk:Jorge612

-- 00:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jorge612


text:
User talk:Azit486

-- 00:16, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Azit486


text: Comments:Privacy law debates in Australia


text:
Thread:Comments:Privacy law debates in Australia/Comments from feedback form - "Appears a very well written, c..."

Appears a very well written, complete and reliable neutral position, I can not check the copyright breaches if any exist but otherwise I think the story ready for poublishing. It is good and that's how I'veb rated it. Thanks. —Robbygay (talk) 00:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Btracy 4

-- 00:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Btracy 4


text:
Talk:United States Government loses AAA credit rating from Standard and Poor's

I really do wonder why so few Wikinews readers bother to rate good news and why a breaking story needs be delayed so long as to become stale news?

Good report for me, but am I the only one using the star rating section in the World, or am I the only Wiki reader who reads other people's stories, other vthan the official reviewers? --Robbygay (talk) 00:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

 * The only reason the story got delayed was because I never put it up for review. I wrote the base of the work, but due to commitments on the work front and a lot of time spent out of the house in other areas, I've had very little net access to get in and finish the job. I initially marked it as a brief so that I could come back and expand it, but I never got the time to expand it.  Sorry it got delayed, but real life at my end comes before real life everywhere else I'm afraid. Sorry. BarkingFish (talk) 11:37, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Catarina10

-- 00:34, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Catarina10


text:
User talk:GIGN sniper

-- 00:55, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:GIGN sniper


text:
User talk:Suirauqa

-- 00:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Suirauqa


text:
User talk:Hbgg

-- 01:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hbgg


text:
User talk:JessicalynnoraUOW

-- 01:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Templates vs links
Hi JessicalynnoraUOW, welcome to Wikinews. I've read a few of your drafts and found you haven't quite mastered the wiki syntax and are mistaking templates for links.

This is how you include a template: there are templates for a lot of things on Wikinews. The national templates (like 'Japan', 'United Kingdom', 'Germany' etc.) provide a handy sidebar showing other stories related to that country. There are topic templates too like 'Crime and law'. To see how these templates look, take a look at Rebekah Brooks resigns from News International - this story has a 'United Kingdom' template on the side.

Now, in text, you can use two different types of links:

or

The former links to the Wikinews page on Tony Blair while the latter links to the Wikipedia page on Tony Blair. If a page exists on Wikinews, it's best to link straight to Wikinews, but if not, link to Wikipedia.

Hope that helps. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:27, 13 August 2011 (UTC) Thanks! It does help. Wikinews is a little confusing at first! :)

 * Just a note.
 * Actually,  can be used always, for simplicity: the w template first looks for a Wikinews page, and links to that if there is one, and only if there isn't a Wikinews page, then links to Wikipedia instead.  --Pi zero (talk) 11:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

ok, is my Japan utilises renewable energy article templated correctly?

 * There were a couple of problems with the sources. I noted them on the article talk page.  --Pi zero (talk) 13:56, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, i believe i have fixed the source issues up now. Is it ready for publishing?

 * I ran into difficulties when starting to move into the rigorous source-check phase of review. Hopefully you can clear up the problems and resubmit; I pulled it off the review queue in the meantime.

 * Things got a bit tangled when I submitted my review, something to do with the article renamings presumably; I think I've got it straightened out now. --Pi zero (talk) 14:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, i think the reason why those articles don't completely cover my facts int he article is because i relied heavily on the WSJ article for information but didn't realise wikinews doesn't allow that as a source. So is it possible to clarify my facts using the WSJ or will i need to re-write the whole article?

 * I left another note on the article talk, to try to clarify things. --Pi zero (talk) 18:36, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

availability for review
Unfortunately, I've gotten busy within the past few hours, so I'm not quite sure whether I can review your article at this time. Furthermore, other reviewers seem to be unavailable or unwilling to review, so I strongly suggest that you and your classmates send messages to as many reviewers as possible and hope they respond. The situation is admittedly getting bad — having 20 articles in the reviewing queue is straining our resources, and we simply cannot guarantee timely review of all 20 articles.

A community discussion is taking place on Water_cooler/policy regarding ways we could reform the current review system. Perhaps it would be helpful for you and your classmates to contribute even one comment to the discussion? It also might help to get a few experienced students from your class to become reviewers themselves — they can apply here. I've noticed that people who are already involved in the community tend to get their articles reviewed more quickly. Ragettho (talk) 03:29, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

 * A few thoughts.
 * Brianmc hoped there'd be a reviewer or two out of last semester, but tbh that seems more likely this semester than last. I suspect it has to do in part with last semester's students knowing less about what to expect here, and in part with final-year students being understandably preoccupied with graduating and getting on with their lives.
 * Note there are lots of opportunities for conflict of interest in UoW students' involvement here. Any UoW-student reviewer would presumably refrain from publishing articles by UoW students.  The water cooler discussion is fraught with hazard for UoW students, since the functioning of the project is directly tied to the reason the UoW students are here at all.
 * --Pi zero (talk) 15:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:JessicalynnoraUOW


text:
User talk:Agustnr

-- 01:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Agustnr


text:
User talk:Sleepingsam

-- 01:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sleepingsam


text:
User talk:Lucas Henrique Oliveira Silva

-- 01:55, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lucas Henrique Oliveira Silva


text:
User talk:Jpwomble21

-- 02:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jpwomble21


text:
User talk:Usersight

-- 02:07, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Usersight


text:
User talk:Vanessamorganxo

-- 02:14, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vanessamorganxo


text:
User talk:I Need a Urine Sample

-- 02:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

— Mike moral  ♪♫  04:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:I Need a Urine Sample


text:
User talk:Oops I Crapped My Pants~enwikinews

-- 02:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

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 Oops I Crapped My Pants. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Oops I Crapped My Pants~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 23:19, 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) 06:35, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Colossuspeng

-- 02:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Colossuspeng


text:
Thread:Comments:Ralph Nader: Obama will likely face challenge in Democratic primaries/Almost a 100 percent chance Nader doesn't know what he's talking about

He should have stuck to his areas of expertise instead of entering the presidential races... but I guess he's not that kind of guy.


text:
User talk:Htm

-- 02:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Htm


text:
User talk:Bancrows

-- 02:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bancrows


text:
User talk:Devika sunil23

-- 02:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Devika sunil23


text:
User talk:Jbassut

-- 02:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jbassut


text:
User talk:ImMorsmordre

-- 03:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:ImMorsmordre


text:
User talk:Buzz007

-- 03:35, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Buzz007


text:
User talk:Carlos gavarrette

-- 03:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Carlos gavarrette


text:
User talk:Zyon788

-- 04:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Zyon788


text:
User talk:Complete Health Medical Group

-- 04:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Complete Health Medical Group


text: User:Oops I Crapped My Pants~enwikinews

title: User:Oops I Crapped My Pants~enwikinews


text: User:I Need a Urine Sample

title: User:I Need a Urine Sample


title: User:ILikePenus101


title: User:C0ckInMyMouth101


text: User:Acne-Ridden Teen

title: User:Acne-Ridden Teen


title: User:I'mQueer990


text: User:Larry the Dolphin IN SPACE!

title: User:Larry the Dolphin IN SPACE!


title: User:PeePeeVajina99


text:
User talk:Jclemens

-- 04:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jclemens


text:
User talk:Jevansoyer

-- 04:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jevansoyer


text:
Thread:Comments:38 killed after US helicopter crashes in Afghanistan/Why are we still over there?

See, this is what our politicians should be talking about. These wars are a heavy burdon on our debt situation and the lives of our soldiers. We cant afford to be over there. And i believe that the strain is more than we can handle.


text:
Thread:Comments:Sitcom star Roseanne Barr announces run for U.S. president/Comments from feedback form - "Seriously......"

Seriously......


text:
Thread:Comments:Privacy law debates in Australia/Comments from feedback form - "Appears a very well written, c..."/reply

Thanks very much! I'm not sure if you can help me with this, but have I sourced the newspapers used correctly? I feel like it doesn't look right ...


text:
User talk:Darek wro

-- 05:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Darek wro


text:
User talk:Ladycygna

-- 05:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ladycygna


text:
User talk:SammyWilson

-- 06:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:SammyWilson


text:
Thread:Comments:38 killed after US helicopter crashes in Afghanistan/Why are we still over there?/reply

It is not a mere coincidence that the most of the causalities are from the Seal that was involved in Osama's operation. Don't want to raise conspiracy theories, but apparently it looks like some kind of cover up..


text:
User talk:Song Ha1967

-- 06:21, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Song Ha1967


text:
User talk:Masumnu

-- 06:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Masumnu


text:
User talk:Rsjbarker

-- 07:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rsjbarker


text:
User talk:엄재민

-- 07:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:엄재민


text:
User talk:Rodrigojil

-- 07:24, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rodrigojil


text:
User talk:Yassie39

-- 07:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yassie39


text:
User talk:Sauromania

-- 07:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sauromania


text:
User talk:Equestr

-- 07:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Equestr


text:
Thread:Comments:38 killed after US helicopter crashes in Afghanistan/Why are we still over there?/reply (2)

Doubt it, Seals/Nightstalkers are used int reaction forces and there are only a few Seal Teams. Just a sad coincidence, but what gets me is that people are already trowing in the towel and saying the Taliban are winning because they got a lucky shot at a chopper taking off.


text:
User talk:Karmsiwan

-- 07:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Karmsiwan


text:
User talk:Herre b

-- 08:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Herre b


text:
User talk:Tatsuya Hyogo

-- 08:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tatsuya Hyogo


text:
User talk:Doric Loon

-- 08:34, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Doric Loon


text:
User talk:Brandonfuhrmann1

-- 08:54, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Brandonfuhrmann1


text:
User talk:Uffo686

-- 09:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Uffo686


text:
User talk:Stanlavisbad

-- 09:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Stanlavisbad


text:
User talk:Eminenzmedia

-- 09:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Eminenzmedia


text:
User talk:Hugui116

-- 09:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hugui116


text:
User talk:Jay varma

-- 09:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jay varma


text:
User talk:Veqryn

-- 09:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Veqryn


text:
User talk:MackBrooks

-- 10:12, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:MackBrooks


text:
User talk:Wztgd

-- 10:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Wztgd


text:
User talk:Aideenuow

-- 10:28, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Ned Kelly's remains found
I left a remark at Talk:Ned Kelly's remains found#Headline. --Pi zero (talk) 14:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

WikiLeaks suspends publishing to fight blockade
There was a problem. See review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 12:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedians to the Games
Hi. :) As you're an Australian contributor, I thought you might be interested in Wikimedians to the Games, which is an opportunity to cover the Paralympic Games as a member of the press. As you've experience writing Wikinews articles, this should give you a leg up. :)  --LauraHale (talk) 08:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aideenuow


text:
User talk:Stefano0707

-- 10:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Stefano0707