text:
Wikinews talk:Site notice of the week

This may have some overlap with template:wn news. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

title: Wikinews talk:Site notice of the week


text:
User talk:Jackbarry99

Hi there. I (hopefully) answered your question on the water-cooler. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:59, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Bawolff ☺☻ 00:59, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The comunity portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

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

title: User talk:Jackbarry99


text:
User talk:AirBa~enwikinews

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Bawolff ☺☻ 01:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The comunity portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

welcome
Just wanted to say hi welcome to wikinews. As you may have noticed, many wikinewsies (myself included) have been misreable. Hopefully that will never happen again. I just felt like going arround and saying hi to people so I'll stop being the annoying admin you gets caught up in wheel wars, but instead have a positive outlook on life. So welcome and happy editing. Bawolff ☺☻ 06:47, 20 April 2006 (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 AirBa. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name AirBa~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 23:12, 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) 06:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:AirBa~enwikinews


text: Template:FAC

title: Template:FAC


text: Template:FA

title: Template:FA


title: File:19March2006.pdf


title: File:19March2006.sxw


text:
User:Flipbaywood

'''MORE IMPORTANT NOTICE: I WILL NOT BE DOING MANY ARTICLES OVER THE SUMMER - IT SEEMS THE WIKINEWS STAFF HAS GROWN AND IS CAPABLE OF PRODUCING AN IMPRESSIVE AMOUNT OF GOOD ARTICLES EACH DAY. I MAY RETURN FOR GOLF OR TENNIS MAJORS, BUT I WILL MOST LIKELY BE VERY VERY INACTIVE DURING THE SUMMER. I WILL STILL CHECK WIKINEWS OCCASIONALLY, BUT I NEED A VERY LONG WIKIBREAK. HAVE A GOOD SUMMER (OR WINTER FOR PEOPLE DOWN UNDER). Flipbaywood 00:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)'''

'''IMPORTANT NOTICE: I CONSTANTLY WORK UNDER MY IP ADDRESS, 69.81.252.232. ALL EDITS FROM THIS IP ADDRESS SHOULD BE TREATED AS EDITS FROM ME. ANYBODY ELSE CLAIMING TO BE ME IS A FRAUD. THANK YOU. Flipbaywood 21:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)'''

Also known as WriterFromAfar755 on Wikipedia User:ReporterFromAfar3136/Subpage You can check out my 'pedia page for more information, but basically, i'm just a guy with a lot of spare time who needs something to write, so i joined up. It's fun here, so I think I'm going to stay. I'd like to help more, and I'm considering helping with audio and print once I gain more experience. I'd love to do original reporting, but nothing much goes on in my hometown.

Wikinews beliefs
1. Voting is not evil. Just because one admin believes that something should be deleted versus 5 good editors that believe it should be kept. If it wasn't for voting (which is still sometimes overruled by zealous speedy deletionists), the admins would always win, which would make this a closed newsroom, not an open one.

2. For some reason, Wikinews seems to have a New Zealand-centric tendency, as displayed here, where New Zealand and Oceania categories have been added to an article about the PS3, whose manafacturing company is Japanese-owned. I'm not criticizing New Zealand's Wikinewsies (in fact, this is a sign that the rest of the world needs to keep pace with New Zealand), but that just seems odd to me.

3. Make sure to use the Developing articles feature. I've rashly published quite a few articles which needed to be categorized and spell-checked. Try at least 15 minutes, 3 hrs. max if news needs to be kept current. We don't want out of date stuff. (My opinion)

My Opinions on Other Stuff /Milestones

Work

 * March 15, 2006-Hawaiian dam bursts 1st article
 * Featured-March 18, 2006-Train kills seven on TV show
 * Featured-March 20, 2006-Cuba and Japan to play in WBC final
 * Majorly contributed (basically made)-March 20, 2006-Federer wins Pacific Life Open in Indian Wells
 * Majorly contributed-Lead story-March 21, 2006-Japan wins World Baseball Classic, 10-6 - 5th article
 * March 29, 2006-Liberian president taken to war court
 * April 5, 2006-Guinea's PM fired by President
 * April 7, 2006-Lead story-Ship sinks off Djibouti, killing at least 109
 * April 10, 2006-Phil Mickelson wins Masters - 10th article
 * April 19, 2006-Sudan reports first bird flu case - Cub Reporter!!
 * April 24, 2006-Microsoft and EU face off in Luxembourg court
 * Complete rewrite-May 3, 2006-Earl Woods, father of Tiger Woods, dies at age 74
 * May 16, 2006-7.4 magnitude hits Pacific near New Zealand
 * May 21, 2006-Sweden wins World Ice Hockey Championships-15th article
 * Majorly contributed (created dupe and added info from there)-Lead story-June 5, 2006-Alan Garcia wins Peruvian presidential election
 * June 18, 2006-Second/Third lead-Geoff Ogilvy wins U.S. Open
 * June 19, 2006-(not really big work)-Helped User:BrokenSegue clean up after User:Cspurrier on wheels!-Why do I have the feeling this is going to happen a lot more often?

Awards
April 19, 2006

/Football box /Flagicon

title: User:Flipbaywood


text:
Talk:Second oil disaster in Estonia within two months

Nice article, good work! --vonbergm 05:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
100s of thousands take to the streets across France

March 19, 2006 Hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets across France this weekend to pressure the conservative government to discard a new law, which they say will erode job security.

The marches were mostly reported as festive and peaceful. Other reports indicate that youths pelted police with objects, overturning and setting fire to a car at the end of the main protest in Paris. Police fired many rounds of tear gas. Demonstrations were also reported in Marseille, Rennes and Lille, where police charged and teargassed crowds.

Rally organisers estimate the turnout across the country at over a million people, with around 500,000 of them in Paris. However, the Interior Ministry reported 503,000 nationwide, with 80,000 in Paris.

The protesters are demanding that the Government withdraw the "First Job Contract" (CPE) – which allows employers to fire workers under the age of 26 without explanation in their first two years on the job. The aim of this new law is to encourage businesses to employ more young workers, given that their employment will be more flexible and convenient in economic terms. In the western city of Rennes, students wore plastic garbage bags with signs declaring: "I am disposable."

The Paris march began with students in front and workers behind, but turned into a multi-generational mix including many parents who joined their teenage children. Banners declared "No to throw-away youths" and "Tired Of Being Squeezed Lemons." The actions are only the third time in almost four decades – after 1968 and 1994 – that students and workers marched together.

"I risk working for two years for nothing, just to be fired at any moment," said Paris student Coralie Huvet, 20. Unemployment is currently a major political issue in France. The French national average is 9.6 percent, and youth unemployment is nearly 21 per cent. The rate rises to 40-50 percent in some of the poor suburbs hit by several weeks of youth rioting last year.

Recent opinion polls show that 68 percent of French people oppose the new law, a rise of 13 percentage points in a week, and that French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin's popularity has dropped six points to 37 percent.

Since the beginning of March, protests, occupations and direct action against the new CPE employment law in France have been increasing, with university and school students leading the dissent.

Railways have been blockaded, airports disrupted, and up to two thirds of France's universities have been occupied or disrupted, as well as many schools. Clashes with police have occurred throughout the country.


text:
User talk:220.253.134.63

Welcome
220.253.134.63, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! - Cartman02au (Talk)(AU Portal) 05:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:220.253.134.63


text:
PlayStation 3 delayed until November

March 19, 2006

Sony is delaying until November the release of its new PlayStation 3 video game console, for all countries. PlayStation 3 was supposed to be released this Spring, but the president of the Sony gaming division, Ken Kutaragi, says the company has decided on improvements since they last announced the release date. He says that Sony wants to include all the latest technology available today, and indicated that the system will run Linux out of the box  The new, later release date could be advantagous to rival Microsoft Corp., which released its competing Xbox 360 console recently. Sony's Australia/New Zealand managing director said the PS3 release in New Zealand is still six to 18 months away.

title: PlayStation 3 delayed until November


text:
Talk:PlayStation 3 delayed until November

Some questions
Where is this being delayed? everywhere or just New Zealand/Australia? Who said this? Where, when? The article is extremely vague - has anyone asked what technology is being improved further? Are there any games already announced for the PS3? Are there other sources who are reporting this information? -  Amgine | talk en.WN 07:52, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

The New Zealand angle
As written, this article is much more about Sony and their new PS3 than it is about NZ. Thanks to the originator, but the large NZ sidebar is too dominant. (The subhead of the sidebar, after all, is "Other New Zealand stories".) Rebuttal is welcome before it is removed, notwithstanding the request next to the template. —67.21.48.122 16:30, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

The sidebar is being removed. It can always easily be restored if its presence can be justified. —67.21.48.122 16:49, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

readership
I bet if Wikinews had in place the tools to discover the reader hits on a story, that this story would exceed all others currently published on the Main Page. -Edbrown05 07:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I will entertain a bet $10 USA currency [Paypal]. -Edbrown05 08:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I bet 10 dollars this is the most hit upon story on Wikinews. -Edbrown05 08:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I bet 10 dollars that I'm the most hit upon guy in Sydney. - Borofkin 08:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
User talk:195.66.108.137

Warning
Hi, this is a warning regarding your behaviour on Monk's body pristine, fifteen years postmortem. You have repeatedly published this article, including when it was disputed. You have failed to respond to concerns raised on the talk page regarding this article. You have failed to edit in good faith regarding this article. You have failed to follow the guidelines of the Neutral point of view.

Please respect the standards of this community. Failure to adhere to them may result in your editing privileges being temporarily suspended. -  Amgine | talk en.WN 08:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, i am just a visitor in this website. I don't use to write or edit articles. 195.66.108.137 12:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:195.66.108.137


text:
Queensland braces for Category 5 cyclone

March 19, 2006

Thousands of residents are evacuating coastal areas of far north Queensland (QLD), set to be lashed by Cyclone Larry tomorrow morning. The Australian Bureau of Meteorology warns that the "very destructive core of Severe Tropical Cyclone Larry, with extreme gusts up to 280 km/hr (174 mph) should cross the coast between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. AEST on Monday (Sunday, 2100 to 2300 UTC). Destructive winds are expected to commence along the coast between Ingham and Port Douglas. Gales are already being experienced along the exposed coast in the warning area."

Tropical Cyclone Larry, currently building off far north Queensland, is expected to intensify before crossing the coast. Queensland tropical cyclone warning centre spokesman Bruce Gunn says people should treat warnings very seriously. "This is the worst cyclone we have had for many, many years," he said.

The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) says the cyclone poses a "very serious threat to life and property" and will now post warnings on the hour on its website.

The BOM also warns coastal residents between Cairns and Townsville of dangerous storm tide when the cyclone crosses the coast. The bureau says the sea is likely to steadily rise up to a level which will be significantly above the normal tide, with damaging waves, strong currents and flooding of low-lying areas extending some way inland. People living in those areas should be prepared to evacuate if advised by authorities.

Mandatory evacuations have been enforced in low-lying seafront areas, including in the Johnstone and Cardwell shires south of Cairns, which are expected to bear the force of Larry and its four metre storm surge.

Disaster coordination centres have been activated in Cairns and Townsville. "There have been mandatory evacuations of coastal shires south of Cairns ... and emergency shelters set up for people who feel at risk with nowhere to go," said a Cairns City Council Disaster Coordination Centre spokesman. "It's most likely thousands of people are evacuating to avoid the high tide."

Premier Peter Beattie has issued a disaster declaration. Local governments now have the power to enforce mandatory evacuations. Queensland Education Department announced that schools in the hardest hit areas will be closed tomorrow, while flights to Townsville and Cairns have been cancelled.

State Emergency Service (SES) volunteers are doorknocking and advising residents to leave. Bruce Gunn from the Queensland cyclone warning centre says the cyclone will coincide with a high tide. "We are talking seawater a couple of metres above the high-tide mark, possibly more than that, with waves on top, so this is a very serious situation we are talking about," he said.

Mr Gunn told the ABC that severe weather will be experienced several hours before the cyclone reaches the coast. "While we are saying the coastal crossing will be between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. AEST, the few hours leading up to that will be rather bumpy — not very nice to experience," he said.


text: File:QueenslandCycloneLarry2006 BOM.gif

title: File:QueenslandCycloneLarry2006 BOM.gif


text:
User talk:67.71.123.166

Welcome
67.71.123.166, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:67.71.123.166


text:
User talk:Stijn Ghesquiere

Welcome
Stijn Ghesquiere, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Stijn Ghesquiere


text:
User talk:Cblaird2

Welcome
Cblaird2, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:20, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Cblaird2


text:
User talk:Jay Melvin

Welcome
Jay Melvin, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Jay Melvin


text:
User talk:Saoshyant

Welcome
Saoshyant, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Saoshyant


text:
User talk:Ali1986

Welcome
Ali1986, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Ali1986


text:
User talk:Sirtalbo

Welcome
Sirtalbo, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:23, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Sirtalbo


text:
User talk:Nptx07

Welcome
Nptx07, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --DragonFire1024 / talk Jason Safoutin 13:23, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how articles should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * Audio Wikinews could always use more contributors
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Nptx07


text:
User:Daniel Bush

Welcome
Wikinews desperately needs more gutsy reporters; please give the project as much time as you can spare. Neutralizer 13:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User:Daniel Bush


text:
Polling data on President Bush's approval rating indicates recent decline

March 19, 2006

A new CBS News poll reports that Americans are increasingly negative about the, and that President Bush's job approval ratings, now down to 34%, continued to decline. The telephone survey of a nationwide random sample of 1136 adults was conducted March 9-12, 2006 and results were released on March 13. The maximum for results based on the full sample is plus or minus three percentage points. Some questions were only asked of half the sample. The poll was conducted shortly before the third anniversary of the US-led invasion of Iraq, and covered feelings about the war in Iraq and overall impressions of President Bush.

A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll also released on March 13 put the President's approval rate at 36%. Other polls conducted over a similar period had similar results, including those by NBC-Wall Street Journal and by Pew, reporting 37% and 33% approval respectively.

Iraq
The CBS poll estimates that 47% of Americans think the eventual success in establishing democracy in Iraq is not at all or not very likely, an increase from 35% when polled on the same issue two months ago. The latest poll found that 15% answered that success is very likely, while 36% thought success is somewhat likely. Both these assessments have dropped from previous poll results of 21% and 42% respectively of those polled in January.

More than half believe that Iraq will never be a stable democracy, an increase from 39% who two months ago believed it could be stabilized. 5% believe Iraq will become a stable democracy in the next year or two.

64% of Americans believe the outcome in Iraq will not affect security in the United States, compared to 28% who believe a positive outcome will deter terrorism in the United States.

Poll results suggest that 71% of Americans believe that civil war is happening now in Iraq, and a majority say the war is not going well. 46% believe most Iraqi people now feel resentful of the U.S., up from 26% in April 2003, although this is a slight decrease from 48% in April 2004. In contrast, 32% say most Iraqis feel grateful, down from 53% in April 2003, and 13% say most Iraqis feel both grateful and resentful.

When asked who is winning the war, 29% said the U.S., 12% said the Iraqi resistance and insurgents, and 53% said neither side.

On progress by the U.S. to train Iraqi troops to manage the conflict, the poll measured a decline from 54% in January to 41% now, although those who felt they didn't know enough to say increased from 26% to 35%.

According to the poll, 50% of Americans do not believe the U.S. government is providing U.S. troops in Iraq enough resources to succeed, compared to 37% who do. However, 76% oppose reinstating the draft to provide additional soldiers for Iraq. According to the CBS report, 59% of Americans believe that the troop numbers should be decreased or that they should be removed entirely. However, 63% believe the troops will remain in Iraq for two or more years. The poll found that 44% of people believe that if the troops were withdrawn, violence in Iraq would increase, while 42% thought the violence would not change. Only 11% of people felt it would lead to less violence.

According to the poll results, the majority of Americans, 54%, believe the U.S. should have stayed out of the war, and 70% believe the war is not worth the costs. A more narrow majority of 51% thought removing was not worth going to war.

When asked why President Bush went to war, 21% said it was to protect the United States, 19% said to protect U.S. oil interests and 11% say to complete the Iraq war effort started by his.

CBS report that 60% of Americans say the war has taken longer than expected, while only 4% say shorter. When asked whether the United States' military action in Iraq has made the U.S. safer from terrorism or not, 30% say it has made the U.S. more safe, 23% say it has made the U.S. less safe and 44% say it has made no difference.

In this poll, slightly more people say the war in Iraq is separate from the war on terrorism than say it is a major or a minor part of the war on terrorism. This is a reversal from the results in December 2005, when 43% of people said it was separate, while 53% said it was a major or minor part of the war on terror.

President Bush's Approval Ratings
The latest poll indicates that 57% of Americans now disapprove of President Bush's performance as president, an increase from 51% who disapproved of his performance two months ago, and a dramatic increase from disapproval ratings of 21% in April 2003. His job approval is now at 34%, down from 42% two months ago. In April 2003, just after the start of the war in Iraq, President Bush had a job approval rating of 73%. When broken down by party affiliation, CBS reports that his approval rating is now 74% among Republicans, 6% among Democrats and 28% among Independents.

The poll also found that more people disapprove than approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The approval rating for the President's handling of the war in Iraq is 31% and for foreign policy in general is 30%. Foreign-policy approval ratings vary by party affiliation, with 64% of Republicans approving, compared to 6% of Democrats and 24% of Independents. Similarly, 73% Republicans approve of the President's handling of the economy, compared to 9% of Democrats and 28% of Independents.

The poll indicates that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe President Bush says things are better in Iraq than they actually are, up to 66% from 58% in January, and less than one-fourth believe that President Bush describes things accurately. In comparison, 24% feel the media portray the situation in Iraq as better than it is. By contrast, 35% say the media description is accurate.

CBS report that the war in Iraq is still seen as the nation's most significant problem. 41% of Americans see the Democratic Party as more likely to make the right decisions regarding Iraq, while 35% see the Republican Party as more likely. The poll results also indicated that a similar number of people approve and disapprove of the President's efforts against terrorism. In contrast, more people approved than disapproved of these efforts back in January, when 52% approved and 43% disapproved.

Based on the latest CBS poll, nearly two thirds of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track, as opposed to a little over a quarter who believe the United States is on the right track. When divided by party affiliation, perception of being on the right track varies from 62% by Republicans to 20% by Independents to 8% by Democrats. When asked about companies from foreign countries operating U.S. ports, 42% say it is never okay, 17% said it is okay if the country was an ally, and 36% said it depends on the country.

Related news


text:
Talk:100s of thousands take to the streets across France

Great story; just wondering
Whether these 2 points might belong in the story from this ap source

1. "We give them two days to see if they understand the message we've sent," said Rene Jouan of CFDT, France's largest union.

2. Students see a subtext in the new law: make it easier to hire and fire to help France compete in a globalizing world economy.

both might be too povish so I won't put them in but maybe others think they might add to the article,I dunno. Neutralizer 16:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

north america
if only the youth of north america would take action like this...

28 of march
A call for national wide strikes is launched. Even not a "general strike".
 * Today news : Tuesday 28 of march a major manif is announced.
 * Since saturday, one people is in coma at Hospital but no one know exactly why (cops, others manifestants, depending the ssers. Its seem that the guy wass drunk. Jacques Divol
 * Do you have a source, which says that other manifestants have hit him, Jacques Divol? I've written an article on de.wn about this incident and I like to present various point of views. It can be a french source, it doesn't matter. --SonicR 16:14, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I heard this on radio but here another source in Libération : Questions sur le blessé de la Nation

I quote libération : "Mardi, en fin de matinée, un nouveau témoignage est venu brouiller les pistes. Un CRS affirme en effet, dans un récit dont l'AFP a obtenu une copie, que le syndicaliste avait indiqué, avant de sombrer dans le coma, que les coups reçus n'avaient pas été portés par les forces de l'ordre. Dans ce témoignage écrit, transmis à l'Inspection générale des services (IGS, la police des polices), ce CRS, resté au chevet de Cyril Ferez jusqu'à l'arrivée des pompiers, indique que la victime souffrait de «multiples traumatismes faciaux» mais qu'elle était «parfaitement consciente» avant son évacuation. En présence des deux pompiers, le syndicaliste aurait alors «déclaré qu'en aucun cas l'agression dont il avait été victime n'était due aux forces de l'ordre», affirme le CRS qui poursuit: «Il paraissait hésiter à me dire la vérité. Après avoir fait preuve d'insistance pour connaître les faits exacts, il m'a avoué avoir eu une altercation avec d'autres manifestants qui l'auraient agressé.»"

Jacques Divol 16:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jacques Divol, or merci. This has helped me a lot. Here is the article in german language, if someone wants to do a translation ;-) Demonstrant im Koma – Schwere Vorwürfe gegen die französische Polizei --SonicR 16:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
User talk:69.37.159.214

Welcome
Wikinews desperately needs more gutsy reporters; please give the project as much time as you can spare. Neutralizer 16:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:69.37.159.214


text:
Talk:Polling data on President Bush's approval rating indicates recent decline

Before placing a tag
note; irid:t, please do not place your edits at the top of the page anymore unless you wish everyone to do the same.
 * I did so in the interest of creating visibility in a talk page with a lengthy discussion. Most people will skip straight to the bottom of the page, thus missing a notice that is important to the community. It is a wiki, you can edit as you please. Add to the top of pages if you like. Hell, erase the entire talk page. Why not create more mock-copies of my text as replies to my comments? Do whatever you want, Neut. irid:t 03:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * please watch the hostility; this is no place for it. Neutralizer 18:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Please address the concerns on the talk page before placing tags. Tags should be a last resort and please consider use the tag edit instead to improve the article. Also, please do not place a tag if not available to collaborate over the corrections needed. Neutralizer 03:00, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Before Reverting or removing tag
Please note that it is not a constructive activity to simply remove a tag. The concerns in the tag are valid and need to be address. Please consider using that edit instead to address those concerns. Thank you. irid:t 02:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * It can be constructive to simply remove a tag, if the tag is not constructive in the first place. -- Avenue 03:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Once a tag is placed, its generally accepted that the person who placed it agree to have it removed. No one's opinion is more important than mine or yours. IMO, a tag requires a consensus to remove if an article is as disputed as this one. Jason Safoutin 03:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That sets up a catch-22 situation if the person placing the tag is unwilling to discuss anything on the talk page. -- Avenue 03:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * And while I generally agree in principle that no one's opinion is more important than others, I think that in practice the judgement of constructively involved editors should take precedence over pronouncements from a distant oracle who apparently can't be bothered to explain these statements, let alone make constructive edits him- or herself. -- Avenue 04:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It can be. It usually isn't when done out of frustration or anger. Hence the notice. irid:t 03:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. -- Avenue 03:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Great Work
Its not easy to copyedit poll results. Very good job. Neutralizer 16:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup notice
The following reason was given for the cleanup notice added by Mrmiscellanious: "As per WN:NOT, "Wikinews articles are not editorials. Articles should restrict themselves to reporting news and not commenting on the news or newsmakers."

The subject of this story is the CBS poll and its results. I see no editorial commentary on the poll (e.g. criticising its methodology or focus) in the current version of our story. If I have missed something, please enlighten me. In the meantime, I am going to remove the notice, since I can see no good reason for it. -- Avenue 01:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure what MrM's issues with the report are, but mine are with the interpretation of the statistics, and the emotionally loaded language used to report them. (I am, unfortunately, someone very sensitive to statistics as I have done a lot of them.)
 * ...President Bush's poll numbers are suffering across the board.
 * This is an example of anthropomorphism used to convince an audience of a specific point of view. A more neutral report would be "President Bush's popularity poll results are lower across the board." (allowing a bit more flexibility than the survey actually allows, but makes the report at least readable.)
 * Three times as many people... Ten times as many people...
 * No actual numbers are reported to support these statements. If 15% of respondents said one thing, and 47% of respondents said something else, that does not necessarily mean 3 times as many saids something else; it depends on the sample weighting and a variety of additional variables which we may not know about. It's one of the issues of a polling report which does not include a methodologies section. Stick to the numbers in the report, don't interpret them.
 * 46% of those polled believe the Iraqi people feel resentment as opposed to 32% who feel grateful.
 * Accuracy to instrument is important. 46% felt most people in Iraq feel resentment, while 32% feel most people in Iraq are grateful, and 13% feel most people in Iraq are both grateful and resentful (note this is the highest since just after the invasion, and is a reverse of the previous trend data.)

 * Similar issues are throughout the article in my brief comparison of the report with the Wikinews article. The data highlighted appears to be reported in a manner to highlight sensational findings, and ignores the trends present in this 4-point survey data report. Longitudinal findings are far more relevant than the current findings. -  Amgine | talk en.WN 01:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks, your detailed and specific criticism is very useful. It gives us something to get our teeth into, in contrast to the general reference to a Wikinews policy that's given in the clean-up notice. -- Avenue 03:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * One minor point about your last edit summary: " - publish; please don't publish a tagged article". The publish tag was there before the cleanup tag was added, and the editor who originally added the cleanup tag failed to remove it (and so did you when you added the cleanup tag again). -- Avenue 09:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I have dealt with Amgine's specific concerns in my recent edits. (I personally think that the "x times as many people..." objections were not terribly significant, but it was easier to change the relevant passages than argue.) I believe the concern about emotionally loaded language has also been addressed. I don't agree with the concern expressed about highlighting sensational findings; selection of the most interesting parts of a story is part of all news reporting. I do agree that the longitudinal trends are more interesting than current numbers, and some further work on incorporating these would be useful (but not vital). However, while I'm not entirely happy with the article yet, I believe it is certainly in better shape than many articles published here. I will therefore remove the cleanup tag and republish the article. If anyone still has serious concerns, please voice them here and make some constructive edits before retagging the article. -- Avenue 10:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

anglo/american point of view
Although I am sure the tagging editors are acting in good faith; if this article was about any other administration in the world, I doubt there would be the tags. If there was concern, the article would simply be edited. Wikinews policy advises us to be on guard against the anglo/american centric pov, which I believe is behind this commotion over an attempt to report simple poll results. The tags are without any merit whatsoever,imo, and should be removed immediately; and the tagger should work on the article rather than just complaining, at least that's the way it seems to me. Neutralizer 04:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Tag has no actionable objections
Tagger does not collaborate so it's impossible to deal with unclear concerns; please join the collaboration here on the talk page. Neutralizer 23:34, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I refuse to "collaborate" here (if you can even call it that) if you continue reverting good-faith edits. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 23:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

New cleanup notice
Mrmiscellanious recently added a cleanup tag, citing the following reasons:
 * "Do not assert that polls are facts. When citing from polls, used "those polled..." not "Americans think..." In addition, there are large gaps between transitioning of the various polls which make this article hard to follow - as well as some other questions and answers of the polls that are ommitted from this article. Please revise."

I feel that this style of editing (repeatedly tagging without discussion on the talk page) comes across as confrontational. I believe that simply making some substantive edits, and initiating or adding to discussions here, would be more constructive.

Moving on to the reasons cited:

What does "various polls" refer to? The CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll? The earlier CBS polls? Please give specific examples of where this is unclear, and show us how one could be fixed. This does not warrant a cleanup tag, in my opinion.

I don't agree that we should say "those polled think..." rather than "Americans think...". Because the data is weighted, a result such as Bush's approval rating of 34% is an estimate of the percentage of American adults who would approve of Bush's job performance, if all Americans were polled. It is not the percentage of those polled who approved. Instead it is a weighted percentage designed to give the best estimate possible from the survey data of what American adults think. So "34% of Americans ..." is more appropriate than "34% of those polled". Even better would be "The poll found that 34% of Americans...".

I feel that the comment "Do not assert that polls are facts" misses the point. It is clear from the story as a whole that statements such "57% of Americans expressed disapproval of President Bush's performance as president" are based on the poll results. We are reporting the fact that this is what the poll results show. I agree that when the notice was added, the wording could have benefited from making this slightly more obvious, and I have made some changes to do so. But adding a cleanup notice over this was over the top, in my opinion. I will remove it again.

Please make constructive edits and contribute to the discussion here. Please do not tag the article for cleanup again, unless you have better reasons than you have expressed so far. -- Avenue 01:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * First of all, I'm pretty sure your edit will be reverted. But secondly, the point MrM makes about polling results is that they are not true as per the definition of a poll. They do not ask every single citizen of the United States, there is a margin of error, and there is bias in the polling methods. They don't accurately represent the American populous. Some people who are unable to think for themselves believe that polls magically determine the beliefs of everyone, including themselves. It's important to understand that these polls are misleading at times. They are not fact. Therefore their inclusion as fact is invalid. irid:t 01:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I already discussed the "fact" issue above. Our article reports the poll results, as described in the CBS report on their poll. It is a fact that CBS have conducted this poll, and that their results purport to describe the views of all American adults. These are the facts that we are reporting. If this is unclear from the article, then this needs to be addressed. But I think the article is very clear about this.
 * We address the margin of sampling error in the first paragraph. I agree that polls can be misleading at times, and that "bias" (in the statistical sense) can sometimes be a serious issue. However any bias would have to be large to affect the sense of most results here, and this seems unlikely to me. Is there any evidence of bias in this survey? If so, we should report on it. -- Avenue 03:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Another tact might be to just quote the CBS poll report itself, which does make assertions like "xx% of Americans think...", so we should be able to say "according to the CBS poll xx% of Americans think ..." That would be more accurate (to satisfy Ironiridis), more qualified (to satisfy MrMiscellaneous) but still assertive (to satisfy Aveneue). SethDelisle 01:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I would agree wholeheartedly with Seth's suggestion, if I wasn't confused by the fact that we already do this (or something close to it), at least for the initial sentence of each paragraph of results (with one exception). Are you suggesting doing this for every sentence? It seems like this is unnecessary, because the context makes it clear that we are reporting the CBS poll's findings, and would make the article much less readable. -- Avenue 03:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You're not satisfying me, I'm just restating what MrM has said previously. :) Anyway, you could shake it up with things like "according to the poll" "the poll indicates" "the data indicates", etc. These things are all factual and still leave the reader to come to their own conclusions about whether the poll is correct. irid:t 03:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ironiridis. Jason Safoutin 03:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, with regard to context, POV is all about subtext. That is, the things we don't say are louder than the things we do. I mean, unless you come right out and bash somebody (*cough*). It's almost needed in a report such as this. I think what I meant here was that you need to be explicit in everything when you're talking about such a touchy subject with such a large potential audience. irid:t 03:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * What is almost needed? You lost me here. -- Avenue 03:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That part... I don't remember why I said that. Chalk it up to me still being at work 13 hours after I got here. :) irid:t 03:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

As I explained above, it is simply not correct to say that "63% of those polled believe the troops will remain in Iraq for two or more years" (my emphasis), due to weighting. Ironiridis, what were you trying to convey here with this wording? Perhaps we can agree on some phrasing that suits us both. -- Avenue 05:12, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Then the polling data cannot be used. It is simply not accurate to say %x of Americans say y because they didn't. We can only say that so many of polled Americans said something, and the fact of the matter is that the weighting is unavoidable in this instance. So either the number is wrong or the fact is wrong. Pick one. I'm sorry.irid:t 05:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Technically, the most accurate thing to say would be: "the CBS poll estimates that xx% of Americans think ..."SethDelisle 18:44, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, I would guess that the unweighted figure is probably within 5 percentage points of the reported figures, and often closer. So we could say "roughly x% of those polled...".
 * Or we could use the formula Seth suggested above, where we say "according to the CBS poll xx% of Americans think ..." or the variations you suggested throughout. I think this is implicit in the current text, but we can make it explicit. -- Avenue 06:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The latest cleanup notice
The latest cleanup notice from Mrmiscellanious gives the following reason for its emplacement: "This article STILL ASSERTS that polls are a representation of all Americans. Please do not continue to assert this. The title also needs to be changed to something more neutral. Notes and notations need to be removed. Sections need to be reformatted."

The title has since been changed. I'm not sure what is meant by "notes and notations". Could this refer to the items in parentheses?

"Sections need to be reformatted." Does anyone have better mind-reading skills than I do about what exactly is desired here?

The article does not assert that "polls are a representation of all Americans." It simply doesn't assert that this particular poll is not a representation of all Americans. (I get the impression that Mrmiscellanious wishes we would.) There is a big difference between these two positions. We can report the assertions by CBS that this particular poll does represent all Americans without saying that every poll is perfect, and even without asserting that their poll is representative. I would be quite happy for us to report assertions that it is not representative, if they are from a reputable or newsworthy source. -- Avenue 07:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC) "64% of Americans believe the outcome in Iraq will not affect security ..."
 * That's absurd for you to make those assertions. Polls are never facts.  Statements like this assert they are:

"When asked why President Bush went to war, 21% said it was to protect the United States ..."

 * Aside of all of that, I do not see how a bunch of polls merged can be an article. It seems a little too much like we're ripping off sources.  Polls should be mentioned in articles, not be their own articles.  --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 11:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * First, thank you for engaging in the discussion.
 * So you find it absurd that I assert that the article doesn't assert what you think it asserts. Hmmm. We do seem to be reading the article quite differently.
 * To me, your quotes prove nothing except that quotes out of context can be used to prove anything. Both of these quotes follow shortly after other passages beginning "The poll estimates that 47% of Americans think ..." and "According to the poll results, the majority of Americans, 54%, believe ...", which seem to me to clearly be stating facts about the poll. And they provide a context in which your quotes can be read (at least by me) as facts about the poll. There has already been plenty of discussion above about how extensive such provisos should be in this article, and what sort of phrases are suitable. Did you not notice this? -- Avenue 13:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * MrMiscellanious said that "notes and notations" need to be removed from the article, and I asked for clarification above about what this meant. I have now removed all parentheses from the article, assuming (in the absence of any response) that this is what was meant. -- Avenue 17:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

tag removal
It seems to me that the article has been delayed long enough with no path having been presented by the tagger to follow which would remove his concerns 100%. Is it time to remove the tag on a consensus basis? I say yes: what do the other involved editors have to say. If someone thinks it should never be published please just say so for clarity sake. Neutralizer 14:43, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Why don't you stop ignoring my claims and start acknowledging them? Oh, that's right.  I'm an American who supported Bush.  I must insert bias in every single article, and stop those I don't like from being published.  Y'know, it's amazing that after all these months, you still do whatever you want - remove a tag because you don't like it, reinsert your messages on users' talk pages where they don't want your comments (I can recall at least a dozen times where you have done the same to me on your page), and leaving little messages on your "team"'s talk pages whenever something doesn't go your way.  I'm sick of it.  Remove the tag if you want, but don't you dare do it if you haven't addressed my concerns.  That is disruption, it is stated in our blocking policy, and I will block you if you continue to ignore concerns on articles.  You must learn there are other people on this wiki, and you are not calling the shots here - everyone does.  --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 20:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you are so "sick of it" then you're welcome to stop engaging in WikiNews - you'd do the site a big favor by stopping your malicious attempts to either censor or obsolte articles which do not make Bush look good. Personally, i think you should have been banned for your disruptive behaviour long ago. --82.141.51.177 01:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * How mature. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 04:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Wasted my time wading through another groundless dispute. The "objections" exemplified with the quotes above can only be raised if one refuses to read the article in context and has very poor understanding of the science behind sampling and polling. To address the second concern the article gives a short explanation of polling and uncertencies in the beginning paragraph and links to wikipedia for more in-depth information. The assertion that someone could mistake the quotes highlighted on the talk page to refer to anything put the polling data is simply ridiculous. I will remove the tag. --vonbergm 02:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I support removal of the tag. (I'm sure no one here will be surprised by that.) MrMiscellanious, I think your claims have been acknowledged very fully here. You have tagged the article five times, but have responded to repeated queries about your reasons on the talk page only once, and that was very late in the debate. I think you are in a very poor position to accuse someone else of disruption. -- Avenue 02:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You have not addressed any of my complaints. This article will remain in development until you do.  --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 04:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * MrM, as it stands you have made 1 single comment on this talk page that addressed the article. I will outline how they have been addressed one by one.
 * By your statement "polls are never facts" you probably meant that the results of polling data only reflect the countrywide opinion with a certain accuracy and probability. This is correct and outlined as a note of caution in the introduction of the article.
 * You assert that the sections you quoted "assert" that polles are facts. Again you probably mean to say that the statements assert that the poll data accurately reflects american sentiment. As several people, including myself, have argued, (and you seem to agree as you do have not refuted these arguments), is is quite ridiculous to assume that any reader will infer this from the statements in the context that they are given in. Moreover, the second quote you gave "When asked why President Bush went to war, 21% said it was to protect the United States" is quite explicit that the number only referes to the people polled.
 * This leaves the last objection, namely your opinion that "Polls should be mentioned in articles, not be their own articles." This can hardly justify the tag, but might be worth a discussion on the policy pages if this is important to you.
 * These are the only concerns of yours currently present. As all were in fact (repeatedly) addressed on the talk page, I will proceed to remove your tag. If you have problems with the arguments presented on the talk page, then participate in the discussion here. Taging without discussion is disruptive. --vonbergm 05:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I've stated my objections many times. The more you individuals ignore them, the longer this article will stay tagged. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 20:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * MrM, please make and effort to be constructive and point out which of your complaints was not addressed as nobody else on this talk page seems to be able to figure it out. As your complaints of this article at this stage is limited to a single post of yours, it should not be too difficult for you to explain what part of this post was not addressed in this discussion. --vonbergm 21:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't make me repeat myself. Read up.  --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 21:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I see tag was removed; so congrats to all who worked on this. Nobody moved to publish so I just did it. Neutralizer 23:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

 * MrM has moved it back to develop, with this edit summary: "Concerns not addressed. Back to development until they are." MrM, what are your concerns?? I can't see any we have not discussed. There seems to be consensus here that the concerns you raised have been addressed, which you refuse to accept. Please explain why. -- Avenue 02:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Note that I don't agree that MrM's concerns have been addressed, only that there have been attempts to address them. These attempts show a willingness to engage with MrM and attempt to collaborate. MrM should show other editors the same courtesy. - Borofkin 02:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * My concerns have not even been acknowledged. That would require actual looking at them, and not dismissing them just because I brought them up (it's became a quite obvious trend).  I'm not going to beg, but I will delay, if users wish to continue to ignore my concerns.  They're quite clear.  --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 02:51, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've looked at all of your edits to the article, and read all of your contributions to the talk page, and I can't say that I really understand what your concerns are. Compare your participation on this talk page with this edit from Amgine. Amgine has quoted from the article and provided a detailed explanation of the problem, in a way that doesn't assume everyone will see things the way he does, and doesn't insult other contributors. By comparison, your first significant contribution to this talk page begins "That's absurd for you to make those assertions," which would have immediately irritated people. Do you see the difference? - Borofkin 03:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * To clarify my last comment above, by "addressed" I meant addressed in good faith here on the talk page, and that changes were made to the article when ones that were acceptable to all parties could be identified. I did not mean that all of MrM's desires were understood, or that those that could be understood were followed when there was no consensus to do so. -- Avenue 07:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Review of conflict
I've had a look, and I agree with vonbergm's claim that considerable work has been done since Mrmiscellanious last participated on the talk page. The edits made in the past 24 hours appear to be good-faith attempts to address Mrmiscellanious' concerns. Mrmiscellanious appears to be refusing to participate in discussion, or acknowledge the work that others have done attempting to address his concerns. His actions may be in violation of Etiquette, specifically "Amend, edit, discuss.", "Work toward agreement", and "Give praise when due." Mrmiscellanious, I think you should make more of an effort to engage with the other editors here on the talk page, and at least acknowledge and comment on the efforts that they have made so far. - Borofkin 02:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * And since you voiced your opinions, I think you should spend less time preaching about all my misdeeds. Furthermore, if users aren't going to listen to other's concerns, then you're going to have to answer this question: why the hell are we here on this site?  Wiki doesn't mean majority goes.  It means everyone has a chance - and no one has even given my proposal a chance.  That's all of your faults if you don't want to.  But don't you dare come back here and accuse me of anything.  --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 02:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Mrm, you haven't even given your own proposal a chance. Besides a tag, what effort have you made to improve this article? Don't you agree it is important news? And if you don't think a poll is news, then I believe that is acting against the community interest. -Edbrown05 03:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * How is a poll news? In this case I do not see it as news. It IMO does not stand the policy of NPOV as the outcome of the poll(s) represents one side. Jason Safoutin 03:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * A teacher/professor of accounting I was forced to listen to liked to remark: "Figures never lie, but liers figure." Where is this story lying? -Edbrown05 03:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Where did I say anyone was "lying". Jason Safoutin 03:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, where in your opinion does the story not stand the test of Neutral Point of View? -Edbrown05 03:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Here's a little story, which I know that many of a cynical nature may wish to undermine. I spoke over the phone with my mother two days ago. After the agenda business of our conversation was complete, it turned to chat. The first thing out of her mouth was, "Bush isn't doing so good." The comment was meant in the context of news she heard two days ago concerning poll results. I told her, "I know, I was working on a that story for Wikinews," and told her a few poll results more than she knew from a brief brush with the issue. And here we are. -Edbrown05 03:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Which is to say, that myself an other contributors are trying to be real here. And make a contribution to the news. Tagging could be seen as lazy. Particularly when the tagger or complainer are not working to improve the story. -Edbrown05 04:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The one-sidedness of the results is exactly why this poll is news. If this poll had given the same results as the last ten polls, it wouldn't rate much interest. It is because Bush's approval ratings are going down, and the public's perception of the war is reported as increasingly negative, that this is news.
 * But it is important to realise that although the results are one-sided, this poll (like most) purports to be a neutral measure of public opinion. If criticisms of the poll itself have been reported, I think we should cover these too. But these criticisms would need to be from a reputable source to be NPOV, unless they can be balanced with praises from someone else. Another NPOV option would be to find an neutral source of guidelines for good poll practice, and critique this poll against that.
 * I also feel strongly that people claiming the article is not NPOV need to be willing to contribute constructively for their views to be taken seriously, and not be viewed as merely disruptive. -- Avenue 06:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Its not as if those who participated in the poll had a gun at their head to force them to give the desired answer - Cartman02au (Talk)(AU Portal) 07:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Categories
edit protected Please add this article to Category:USA Today and update the wikilink to become local. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 16:47, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Pi zero (talk) 01:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

edit protected Please add this article to Category:CBS News, and localize the link of the same name as well as the links for "Iraq War", "George W. Bush", "George H. W. Bush" and "Saddam Hussein". Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 09:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Added cats and w-ized. --Pi zero (talk) 20:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC)


text:
User:Leflyman~enwikinews

Please see: Leflyman at Wikipedia.

title: User:Leflyman~enwikinews


text:
Avian flu cause of Egyptian woman's death

March 19, 2006

A 30 year old Egyptian woman has died from an infection with the H5N1 strain of the avian flu. The cause of death was confirmed by the Cairo-based US Naval Medical Research Unit (NAMRU). The woman was keeping birds in her home in violation of a government ban on the practice. The Egyptian Health Ministry has also reported that initial tests of a 28 year old man indicate that his is the second case of human infection in Egypt. Both cases were from the same area in the country, and both people reportedly were treated with the drug Tamiflu. Doctors are expecting the man to survive.

Nearly 100 people worldwide have died from the H5N1 virus, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).


text:
Report Specifies 'Black Room' of Abuse in Iraq

March 19, 2006

A New York Times report tells of a shadowy military unit named Task Force 6-26 which, in early 2004, used a former Iraqi military base near Baghdad as a top-secret detention center. Inside, American soldiers made one of the former Iraqi government's torture chambers into one of their own, dubbing it the Black Room.

The Black Room was a garage-sized room, painted jet-black and with no windows. Inside, soldiers beat prisoners and abused them verbally. They used them for target practice with paintball guns in a nearby area. The intention was to gain information from the detainees as to the whereabouts of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Salafi Islamist militant, a guerrilla leader, and the putative leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The temporary detention site was part of Camp Narma, the headquarters of Task Force 6-26, and was the first stop for many insurgents before going to the Abu Ghraib prison, which was a few miles away.


text:
User talk:MStraw

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 19:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The comunity portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:MStraw


text:
User talk:ScottGant

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 19:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The comunity portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Welcome
Wikinews desperately needs more gutsy reporters; please give the project as much time as you can spare. Neutralizer 00:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Article review
I would love to have time to review your article. The news is not breaking, however, as it is regarding an investigative report from the NYTimes, and is not particularly time sensitive. I have several other tasks to accomplish, after which I will be able to review the article. I have asked others to review it as well, as it is a single-source article at the moment. Hopefully it will get reviewed in a short time frame.

You could also request people to review your article as well. -  Amgine | talk en.WN 00:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:ScottGant


text:
User talk:Gonne junior~enwikinews

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 19:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The comunity portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

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 Gonne junior. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Gonne junior~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 23:18, 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) 06:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gonne junior~enwikinews


text:
User talk:Htonl

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 19:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The comunity portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Htonl


text:
Personal relationship between Bush and McCallum questioned

March 19, 2006

Australia's major newspapers are highlighting the personal relationship between the U.S. President George Bush and his newly nominated Australian ambassador, Robert McCallum. Australian reporters Phillip Hudson of The Age, and Mark Coultan of the Sydney Morning Herald, have written stories examining the Bush/McCallum friendship which allegedly dates back to 39 years ago when they were inducted into the Skull and Bones society.

The Australian ambassadorship post had been vacant for 13 months, which former deputy prime minister Tim Fischer said was an "unforgivable" delay. The McCallum nomination on March 11 would replace the former ambassador Tom Schieffer who left the post in February 2005. United States President George W. Bush nominated McCallum on March 11th.,2006

McCallum is an associate attorney-general for the Department of Justice and previously represented big tobacco companies at an Atlanta law firm. He also has a master's degree from Oxford University and is a Rhodes Scholar as well as having a bachelor's degree from Yale.

The two Australian papers report on activities of Bush and McCallum in their younger years, and the Sydney Morning Herald alleges that personal connections were instrumental in the career advancements of both men.

McCallum also made news last year when he overrode U.S. Justice Department lawyers who had been handling the government's tobacco racketeering trial for the past 5 years. McCallum ordered the lawyers to reduce the penalties sought at the close of the nine-month trial from $130 billion to $10 billion, angering some of the trial lawyers to the point where it is reported they threatened to quit their jobs. McCallum said the reduction was necessary as a matter of law.


text:
Talk:Personal relationship between Bush and McCallum questioned

I find it interesting that this "prepared" article is produced and labelled as a "minor" edit. --Brian McNeil / talk 19:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Amgine acted "out of process", I think, when he deleted a similar "disputed" article; not even bothering with a deletion request. I see this as blatent vandalism and have asked admins to have a look.
 * Hopefully this article will now receive some objective evaluation. If one imagines the term "XYZ Men's Club" instead of the S&B; which some wish to censor out of all reporting as a "taboo subject matter"; it might help, I think. I have decided to really try to collaborate on finding a compromise on this article as it's important to the integrity of the project that we not simply censor out topics because some feel uncomfortable about them. If one applys logic rather than labelization("conspiracy theory"),pre-conceived notions, and assumptions, there is really nothing wrong with this article at all,imo. Neutralizer 20:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Not news and POV
All previous comments about this article, which is a repeated recreation of content previously removed from the main namespace, apply here. None have been addressed, and this is disruptive behavior. -  Amgine | talk en.WN 20:20, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * This article highlights the Australian news coverage and there are no actionable objections here at all; you can not demand editors address your previous objections to a previous article since you have unilaterally deleted that article and those objections. If your objections are the same; please cut and paste them here so they may be addressed. I demand the right to collaborate over the specious tags if you put them here also. Neutralizer 20:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Trying to meet npov concerns
is it on the right track now? Neutralizer 20:35, 19 March 2006 (UTC) 202.169.218.174 08:01, 23 March 2006 (UTC) I deleted "some bizzare" from the story. Does this solve the npov problem? (inkybutton in wikipedia)

Not really news, but could be...
As it stands, all this article is doing is highlighting the fact that Australian news is interested in the President's relationship with the US Ambassador to Australia. This isn't news - it would be like saying that US news is interested in something that applies to the US. Not a big surprise. What COULD be news, depending on how this would be written is something like "Personal relationship between Bush and McCallum Questioned", and a discussion of why this is occuring, what issues it may cause, and the reactions of press both in the US and AMerica, along with government officials. Lyellin 21:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Are we really interested in writing news articles *about* news articles? Just a personal opinion, perhaps, but I think this is an attempt to create news where there is none to push a POV. -  Amgine | talk en.WN 21:45, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I will try to develop an article along the lines of Lyellin's suggestion. It is normal for editors to work on stories about topics that interest them and reasonable for other editors to notice pov when it exists; but not reasonable to tag articles when there is no pov manifested within the article; it would seem to me. Neutralizer 23:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * In reply to Amgine - no it's not something we should be interested in. It could be interesting though, to explore the relationship between the two people - or to write a piece on the appointment of the ambassador. Both of those could also include other's opinions - other editorials. Lyellin 23:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * And to continue on that vein - the intitial article could seriously be considered a POV violation Neutralizer - and it is apporpiate for someone to tag an article and mention their concerns on the talk page. That's how we fix these things. Lyellin 23:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Agreed 100% Lyellin, but Amgine actually deleted that initial article (and put it in my own user space) without going through our deletion request process and he did that some 18 hours after the last previous edit. Neutralizer 23:45, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I see no substantial content in here that would suggest this page be more than an editorial suited for a conspiracy theory forum. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 23:30, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * One further exploration, it does appear that the subject of the ambassador being appointed has been covered. I'm unsure now if a proper direction for THIS article is possible. Working through possible angles, I don't think I find one that is actually news, and not POV regarding the topic. Lyellin 00:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Lyellin, what about your additional suggestion above; "It could be interesting though, to explore the relationship between the two people"? That is the angle I plan to work on and have been doing research on...so I will forge ahead with that approach; as you see I changed the title to the one you suggested. Neutralizer 00:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The way I had it framed in my head was one where it would be something related to the appointment of the Ambassador. In this instance... it's close to being just a smeer/conspiracy article. I would probably encourage a writer to work on it more, but put it as developing, and see where it went. Could work as a research news article - something akin to what Time does.... but I'm cautious that that might not occur. 67.171.75.30 01:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Right; ok; we'll give it a try. Neutralizer 03:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Title change
The title change actually does a little for the article and reflects it better than the previous one - Cartman02au (Talk)(AU Portal) 07:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

IMHO

 * 1) The Age and the SMH article are essentially from the same source - Fairfax. So not much variety in sources.
 * 2) The use of "bizarre" is NPOV.

The article is an interesting obsevation, although perhaps not necessarily "newsworthy"... --elliot_k 14:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Will deal with word "bizarre". please feel free to edit. Neutralizer 13:42, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi Neutralizer, Someone already did! --elliot_k 13:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

NPOV Tag
The tagger has not said why the article is npov. This tag should be removed and I will if there is no actionable objection? Neutralizer 13:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I thinks its cool to remove the NPOV Tag. --elliot_k 13:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

remove other tag and publish?
I have added another source and expanded. hopefully it can be daye bumped and oublished now. Neutralizer 23:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it's a heads-up news story. -Edbrown05 03:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Wait a minute! The who is McCallum isn't answered (at all). -Edbrown05 04:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Nor when appointed. -Edbrown05 04:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The more I tear into the structure of this story, the more I see gaps. It does needs transition paragraphs to provide context. (My intent was not to destroy the flow by moving paragraphs earlier in the edit history) -Edbrown05 04:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok; hopefully ok now; please unpublish if it's not ok. Neutralizer 23:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I've got to go, but please use the template to link to previous stories... The proper format is. This isn't an actionable objection of course, just a style thing. --Chiacomo (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * ok;thanks Neutralizer 00:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
User:Htonl

See w:en:User:Htonl (my main Wikimedia account).

title: User:Htonl


text:
Federer wins Pacific Life Open in Indian Wells

March 20, 2006 Yesterday, in, California, Roger Federer, the top ranked tennis player in the world, defeated 7-5, 6-3, 6-0 to win his third consecutive , part of the. Blake held an early lead 4-1 in the first set, but Federer came back and dominated the last two sets. Federer is the first player to win three Pacific Life Opens in a row since 1976. Federer remained at number 1, while Blake moved up from 14th to 9th in the world rankings.

Federer struggled to find his game at first, but he caught on to Blake's playing style during the start of the game. "He played aggressively, took the ball early, put away his forehands when he could, didn't miss on the backhand, made me run around," Federer said. "That's usually what I do. He gave me a little bit of my own medicine." Federer has now won three titles this year, one of them being the. He has a 22-1 record, with his only loss going to Rafael Nadal at the Dubai Tennis Championship. His final statement was, "It was a hard-fought battle in the beginning. Really got the better of me in the beginning, so I had to react and not panic. I did a good job there. In the end, I played fantastic tennis with some great shots once again ... the form is excellent right now."

Blake took out 2nd seeded Rafael Nadal in the semifinals and nearly cruised through the first set. Unfortunately, he made just enough mistakes in the end of the set for Federer to pull through after a 5-4 lead. Blake is now 19-5 for the year, with wins at the Sydney International and the. After the match, he said, "A couple of shots he was swinging at, you could tell, just he had that confidence where he feels like he's not going to miss. Everything was going in ... here are a lot of guys that can go through little runs like that, three or four games where they feel like they can't miss, you wait it out, wait it out, then you get your chance. I couldn't wait any longer. He's one of the guys that can keep it up. He kept it up for that whole set, probably set and a half really. Actually, from early in the second set, he was playing like that. It's tough to combat that. It's been a great week. This stings right now. I think as long as I'm a competitor, as long as I'm on tour, it's always going to sting after a loss. But I'll just reflect on the fact that it's a good week, I moved up in the rankings played some great tennis, had some fun out here."


text:
User talk:Jecrouch

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Bawolff ☺☻ 22:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Newsroom - The comunity portal
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:Jecrouch


text:
Scotland wins Gold, Silver in 400m IM

March 20, 2006

David Carry and Euan Dale yesterday pulled off a remarkable feat for Scotland — claiming both first and second place in the 400m Individual Medley swimming race in Melbourne.

For Carry, who swam a 4:15.98, the gold was his second of the games and Scotland's forth gold medal in swimming until now. He becomes the first Scottish person to win two golds at the games in thirty-two years — David Wilkie being the last Scot to do so in 1974.

The games have presented several surprises thus far — most notably Australia's failure to win more than one gold medal in the men's events up to this point. Matthew John Cowdrey won the sole gold medal for Australia in the 50m freestyle on Saturday. By contrast, the Australian women have had an excellent start so far, with a medal haul of 21 out of a possible 37.

South Africa once again demonstrated its strength in men's freestyle swimming by winning the 4 x 100m freestyle relay in 3:14.97, beating the Australian by slightly over half a second. Canada claimed third place.

title: Scotland wins Gold, Silver in 400m IM


text:
Talk:Scotland wins Gold, Silver in 400m IM

As always, this story was originally published on Swim-Sites, now i've released into the public domain via Wikinews. → CGorman (Talk) 23:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Might be informative to tell what "games" these are.


text:
Six Nations Cup

March 18, 2006 In the Six Nations Cup, Ireland beat England 28 points to 24, to win The Triple Crown. France, on the other hand, won the overall championship. Remember — The Rugby World Cup is only but eighteen months away! Looking at Irelands performance in the championship they are certainly a team that gel well together and are on the way up.Ireland have now beaten England on the last three occasions that these sides have met.

title: Six Nations Cup


text:
Crowe, Holmes succeed in takeover of Rabbitohs

March 20, 2006

Australian actor Russell Crowe and businessman Peter Holmes a Court have succeeded in their bid to take over the South Sydney Rabbitohs, an Australian National Rugby League (NRL) Club. The men required that 75% of the club's members vote yes on the $3 million takeover bid for it to pass; and it narrowly won, by just 32 votes (0.8%). Former Souths player and manager, George Piggins, has vowed never to attend another game of his former club.

Supporters of the bid have said it gives the Rabbitohs a chance to return to their glory days after last year's finish of 13th in the 15-team competition. The team has not won a Premiership in 35 years but still retains the record for most Premiership wins, with 20 on the record books. Those against the bid objected that the club is selling out 98 years of heritage.


text:
User talk:202.67.77.125

Hi, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! I see that you've been contributing to articles about Australia. If you're an Aussie, you may want to take a look at the Australian portal, and the Australian discussion page. If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! - Borofkin 01:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Crowe Takeover Official
Hi... Welcome to Wikinews. Thanks for starting the article Crowe Takeover Official. It's a great article, however there are a few things that need to be fixed up before it can be published. The main thing is that you need to cite sources for everything said in an article. Sometimes this means linking to a news article available elsewhere on the Internet, however with original reporting, you should place a comment on the talk page explaining where the information came from. "Original reporting" is when you write an article based on personal experience.

I hope you decide to stick around... you may want to have a look at the Australian portal and Australian discussion page. - Borofkin 01:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:202.67.77.125


text:
User talk:Ronan.evans

Hi Ronan... welcome to Wikinews Australia! I see that you've joined the Federal politics project. This is an exciting project, an attempt to completely bypass the mainstream media, generating news content solely based on original source material such as media releases, transcripts, etc, and seeking comments directly from ministers. I encourage you to be bold... don't worry if you aren't sure exactly how to do something, because there are always people around to give you a hand. If you have any questions feel free to leave a message on my talk page. - Borofkin 01:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Adding photo's to articles
First you need to upload it. If the photo is licensed under a free license, then you should upload it to the Wikimeda Commons. If it is fair use, you should upload it here on Wikinews, using the "Upload fair use media" link in the toolbox (on the left). See Fair use for a description of what types of images should be uploaded to Wikinews, and what should go to the Commons.

Once the image is uploaded, you add it to an article using the "Image" tag. Example:. Have a look at an existing article for examples of the Image tag.

Using images can be a bit of a hassle until you figure it all out. Licensing is the biggest problem - we need to make sure the image is appropriately licensed.

- Borofkin 23:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Ok, thanks, that helps a lot.

Ronan.evans 05:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome
Wikinews desperately needs more gutsy reporters; please give the project as much time as you can spare. Neutralizer 11:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ronan.evans