text:
Australian Prime Minister announces new cabinet

June 29, 2010 Australia's first woman prime minister (PM), Julia Gillard, has announced the cabinet she'll be taking to the federal election, with no mention of former PM Kevin Rudd.

The (ALP) voted Mr Rudd out of parliamentary leadership in a special caucus election last week. "The new leader elected unopposed is Julia Gillard and the deputy will be Wayne Swan," Senator told media after the caucus.

The key differences between Ms Gillard's and Mr Rudd's cabinet are becoming Minister of Education, Workplace Relations and Social Inclusion, replacing Gillard; and  adding Minister for Trade, replacing Crean, to his position as Minister for Foreign Affairs.

In a statement Mr Rudd said, "[u]ltimately, decisions on Cabinet appointments are a matter for the Prime Minister" and he is respectful of her decision. Ms Gillard said, however, that she would be happy to include Mr Rudd as a senior cabinet minister after the election.

The next election is constitutionally due in early 2011 but Ms Gillard has indicated that it will be held this year.


text: User talk:Faiz4u

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

title: User talk:Faiz4u


text: User talk:Mindhacks

title: User talk:Mindhacks


text: User talk:Missweivvei

title: User talk:Missweivvei


text:
Talk:Jimmie Johnson wins 2010 Lenox Industrial Tools 301 NASCAR race in New Hampshire

Article title
I gather from the links in the article that this has something to do with the NASCAR series. However, as a Wikinews article, could it be made more international and less like another billboard for the sponsors? --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 06:56, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

 * yes, and it shall contain where did it happen. Mars? Neptune? North Korea? Diego Grez return fire 13:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh good, adding "in New Hampshire" made all the difference. --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 06:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I changed the second sentence to read: "It was his fifth victory in the 2010 season of the US's leading professional stock car series ... " Did that help? Or should articles about national sports contain more background for international readers. --InfantGorilla (talk) 09:09, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * My issue was with the title, which is the first thing that people see. I read "Jimmy Johnson wins 2010 Lenox Industrial Tools 301" and thought he'd got some freebie equipment from the local DIY store. --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 19:09, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm with Alexandr on this one. What is a Lenox Industrial Tools 301? If you insist on using the stupid promo name at least append 'race' or something to it. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:17, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I completely disagree with all of you. Like what would you think a Lenox Industrial Tools 301 was...ummmm aren't viewers supposed to look at the article instead of reading its name. -- Nascar 1996  00:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, try to remember that we're writing for the entire world; to take the example of those who commented above, we have people from Morocco, Chile, don't know, and Scotland, none of which have ever probably heard of NASCAR, much less a specific race, and probably had no idea what the 2010 Lenox Industrial Tools 301 is. C628 (talk) 00:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If they don't pay attention then why care? -- Nascar 1996  02:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If the headline was something like: Another win by Johnson improves his chances in leading American stock car series, then it might attract foreign sports fans who do not keep up to date on every motor sport competition. I think your article deserves readers, and a good headline (more snappy than my suggestion, but less opaque than yours).  If they were already NASCAR fans, they would be on a NASCAR site.  If they love freedom of the press but also love sports, they might be here. --InfantGorilla (talk) 14:20, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * With some help how is this title for NASCAR races: wins  summer NASCAR race at ?
 * It looks good, but thinking up something original based on the news from the race is better, in my (humble) opinion. --InfantGorilla (talk) 17:35, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Such as?????? -- Nascar 1996  19:34, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

 * The name is supposed to mean something, and this is nothing to do with paying attention. You want people to read your article, no? I like motorsport. I follow Formula One fairly closely. If you try to engage me, I may well become quite interested in NASCAR; the idea of an overweight, scarcely controllable racing car makes for an interesting race for me, and I can recognise the skill involved. Wikinews cannot focus on any single region and just pretend that all its readers come from there. If I can't understand it, I won't read it - and I won't publish it, either. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Understand what? I'm confused. -- Nascar 1996  20:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The same thing as this conversation has always been about: the title. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, so how do you like the new title? -- Nascar 1996  21:04, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm happy with it. It's a touch long, but it's ok. Is there only ever one race in each location (New Hampshire in this case) per year? If so, you could maybe run with Driver wins 2010 Location NASCAR race or something. Does that work? Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 21:53, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No, there are two New Hamshire race and two races at most place. For more information you may want to go here. -- Nascar 1996  23:40, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:24, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Your welcome. -- Nascar 1996  17:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


text:
Russian police to 'check' officer allegedly involved in large theft and murder

July 4, 2010

's Department for Own Safety says it will begin a "check" on lieutenant colonel Artem Kuznetsov, who is publicly accused by a group of American lawyers of illegitimately imprisoning and then torturing Russian lawyer  to death. Later, head of Investigating Committee of the Prosecution Office said he will "personally check" the course of investigation into actions by Kuznetsov and his coworkers. In 2007 and 2008, Magnitsky worked in Russia for American investment fund company and was involved in the disclosure of a large-scale corruption among several top law enforcement officials in Moscow.

Lawyers concerned with the death of Magnitsky, which occurred in on November 16 of last year, started the bilingual website russian-untouchables.com, where they presented evidence of Artem Kuznetsov's alleged efforts to cloak the crimes. As reported by the website's authors, Kuznetsov was a key player in a US$230 million theft from the Russian government and then successfully brought criminal charges against everyone who reported his theft.

The central part of website material is a ten-minute video providing a summary of the case. Its main point is the fact that multiple large-scale luxury buyings registered to members of Kuznetsov's family; they are not comparable to official income of all of these persons. It is emphasized in the video that Kuznetsov's official monthly income is $850 per month (in ), and to gain all the assets found to be connected with him he would have to work for 322 years. The video was released in the middle of last week, and gained enormous popularity within Russian blogosphere, and drew attention of some mass media.

One of the American lawyers, Jamison Firestone, states at the website that last month he directed several petitions to check the sources of Kuznetsov's family wealth to Russian authorities: the President of Russia, Prosecutor General, Department for Own Safety and Department for Preventing Corruption and Other Crimes of Interior Ministry. News website states that addresses were directed on May, 21, but there were no replies since then.

Magnitsky's case has received international attention for several months. In April 2010 US Senator proposed the cancellation of US visas to 60 Russian officials allegedly connected with Magnitsky's death. He directed an appeal to US State Secretary Hillary Clinton.

There has been no decision on it yet, but last Tuesday Clinton urged Russia to bring officials responsible for the death of Magnitsky to justice, The Daily Telegraph says. She told the US-Russia "Civil Society to Civil Society" summit in Washington that the Obama administration is "deeply concerned about the safety of journalists and human rights activists in Russia". In the meantime Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev were meeting last week during Medvedev's visit to US.

Magnitsky's advocates emphasize that Kuznetsov, since committing his crimes, was promoted in service; previously, he was working for the Department of Tax Crimes of the Central Internal Affairs Directorate of Moscow, and at the start of 2010 began to work in Department for Economic Safety of the Interior Ministry. Recently there were many cases when civil groups and private persons publicly reported alleged large-scale corruption crimes within top Russian authorities, with some evidence provided.


text: User talk:SpencerCollins

title: User talk:SpencerCollins


text: User talk:Akaansha.m

title: User talk:Akaansha.m


text: User talk:Adoqq

title: User talk:Adoqq


text: User talk:Suganthimanivelan

title: User talk:Suganthimanivelan


text:
Thread:Comments:Fiji joins the Non-Aligned Movement/Comments from feedback form - "Fiji under the military junta ..."/reply (2)

The conditions of indian origin people in Fiji is deteriorating day by day. The christian missionaries backed by Vatican are making large scale atrocities against one of the least heard people in Pacific. Hope US, UN and India make note of FIjian government and help the Fijian Indians gain some social political economic justice.


text: User talk:Juy123

title: User talk:Juy123


text: User talk:RegisIII

title: User talk:RegisIII


text: User talk:Jiteshkrish

title: User talk:Jiteshkrish


text: User talk:KandyHeart

title: User talk:KandyHeart


text: User talk:Israel91

title: User talk:Israel91


text: User talk:Elena tricolici

title: User talk:Elena tricolici


text: User talk:Milan Řepka

title: User talk:Milan Řepka


text: User talk:Khan parvez99

title: User talk:Khan parvez99


text: User talk:Lavendra bhatt

title: User talk:Lavendra bhatt


text: User talk:Semuel lusi

title: User talk:Semuel lusi


text: User talk:CHCK4190

title: User talk:CHCK4190


text:
Thread:Comments:Gulf of Mexico oil spill expanding; submarines to try to stop leak/Comments from feedback form - "this sucks"

this sucks


text:
Thread:Comments:Gulf of Mexico oil spill expanding; submarines to try to stop leak/Comments from feedback form - "Good"

Good


text: User talk:Emmac123

title: User talk:Emmac123


text: User talk:Moonglad

title: User talk:Moonglad


text: User talk:Alexei Erofeev

title: User talk:Alexei Erofeev


text:
User talk:Blaxthos

Tempodivalse [talk]  12:37, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Blaxthos


text:
User talk:Jafro

Tempodivalse [talk]  12:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jafro


text: User talk:NeF

title: User talk:NeF


text:
Thread:Comments:Australian Labor Party caucus vote to change prime minister/So she kept Stephen Conroy in

Well, what can I say, I knew it, we're screwed either way.

lol rhyme

Seriously though, why the hell is Conroy allowed to even live ffs?


text: User talk:Sjemitchell

title: User talk:Sjemitchell


text: User talk:Pavleu

title: User talk:Pavleu


text: Comments:Australian rules football: 2010 Gippsland Football League round 11 - Wonthaggi v Traralgon


text: User talk:Dianariechman

title: User talk:Dianariechman


text: User talk:Dyanzkrenz

title: User talk:Dyanzkrenz


text: User talk:Anirbanmajumder38

title: User talk:Anirbanmajumder38


text:
US Senator Robert Byrd dies at age 92

June 29, 2010

, the longest serving member of the, died yesterday at the age of 92.

A spokesman for the Democratic Senator from the state of West Virginia said Byrd had been hospitalized since last week. At first he was thought to have been suffering from and severe  but other medical conditions developed. On Sunday, his condition was described as "serious".

Byrd was first elected to the in 1952 and to the U.S. Senate in 1958. He suffered from ill health in recent years but retained his reputation for securing millions in federal funding for his home state.

Throughout his career in the U.S Senate he held positions including, twice and  once. Due to his status as the longest serving Senator, Byrd was serving as, which made him third in line in the Presidential line of succession. Senator of Hawaii has been sworn in as the new President pro tempore.

Byrd served nine terms in the Senate and was labeled by critics as the "King of ". He used his former chairmanship of the to steer over one billion dollars in federal aid to West Virginia, one of the poorest states in the country, described by him as, "one of the rock bottomest [sic] of states".

Byrd took the title to heart and had no apologies about it, saying, "Pork, to the critic, is service to the people who enjoy some of the good things in life, and I've been happy to bring to West Virginia the projects to which they refer. I have no apology for it."

Byrd was originally born as Cornelius Calvin Sale, Jr. on November 20, 1917. He grew up in the coal mining regions of southern West Virginia with his aunt and uncle, who adopted him following the death of his mother in the. He was the valedictorian of his high school class, but could not afford college and did not attend university courses until his 30s and 40s.

The Senator had a fondness for history, and included excerpts of poetry, Shakespeare, Greek and Roman classics along with verses from the Bible in his Senate speeches. He considered himself a staunch defender of United States Constitution, and carried a copy of it in his pocket. Byrd was versed in using some of the Senate's arcane rules to his advantage. He received awards from the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians for significant contributions to history.

Byrd had his share of controversy. He was at one time a member of the, serving as the top officer of his local chapter and once held racial segregationist views. Byrd was involved in the against the landmark, which he voted against. Byrd later explicitly and repeatedly denounced his former segregationist views.

Byrd is the only Senator to have voted against the nominations of African-American justices  and Marshall's successor following his retirement,. Byrd's opposition of Thomas was based on the testimony of who accused Thomas of sexually harassing her and due to the fact that Byrd felt Thomas was "injecting racism" into the debate by using the phrase "high-tech lynching of uppity blacks" in his defense against the allegations.

Byrd, who supported the, was one of the most outspoken critics of the. He voted against the. Byrd spoke on the eve the invasion saying, "Today I weep for my country. [...] No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination."

title: US Senator Robert Byrd dies at age 92


text: User talk:Wvy8616

title: User talk:Wvy8616


text: User talk:Rachelyouens

title: User talk:Rachelyouens


text:
User talk:Sankha~enwikinews

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Sankha. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Sankha~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 23:28, 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) 06:36, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sankha~enwikinews


text: User talk:Amarkant singh

title: User talk:Amarkant singh


text:
User talk:Physical G

Physical Gold
Hi, please do not place any kind of on our website - it will be  so no one will see it. If you do want to contribute to Wikinews, see the introduction.--Cspurrier (talk) 15:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Physical G


text: User talk:Mozesjunior

title: User talk:Mozesjunior


text: User talk:Nirajsaini

title: User talk:Nirajsaini


text: User talk:Luzluz19

title: User talk:Luzluz19


text: User talk:Snakespeaker

title: User talk:Snakespeaker


text: User talk:Jksiddu

title: User talk:Jksiddu


text: User talk:Dhaval4friend

title: User talk:Dhaval4friend


text:
Comments:Two Newcastle football players fight each other, both sent off

Comments from feedback form - "Maybe there is an explanation,..."
Maybe there is an explanation, why they fought? —84.50.162.159 (talk) 16:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:Msm

title: User talk:Msm


text: User talk:Monicaemperatriztirado

title: User talk:Monicaemperatriztirado


text: User talk:Rometw

title: User talk:Rometw


text: User talk:Tajpopal

title: User talk:Tajpopal


text: User talk:RentalsVallarta

title: User talk:RentalsVallarta


text: User talk:Uma and sankar

title: User talk:Uma and sankar


text: User talk:Lababa55

title: User talk:Lababa55


text: User talk:Lord Sapphire

title: User talk:Lord Sapphire


text: User talk:Nd4SU

title: User talk:Nd4SU


text: User talk:Kalaivanan S

title: User talk:Kalaivanan S


text: User talk:Stevenazar

title: User talk:Stevenazar


text: User talk:Stalker

title: User talk:Stalker


text:
European oil companies stop trade with Iran

June 28, 2010 French oil company announced Monday that it has stopped shipping petroleum products to Iran, the latest Western oil company to stop or reduce trade with the country.

A spokesperson for Total, confirming an earlier report, said that the company "has suspended its sales of gasoline or refined products to Iran." Although Total didn't comment on specifics, an anonymous source said that the cessation of trade had minimal effect on Iran, and had begun several weeks ago.

In a separate development, a Spanish company,, said that it was no longer planning to take part in developing a large gas field in the southern part of Iran.

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a news conference that he was unconcerned by the actions of Total and Repsol, saying that despite current limitations in the refining of oil, Iran would make up the disruption in its gasoline supply "within one week."

Total and Repsol's announcements come soon after a fourth round of sanctions against Iran were approved by the United Nations, and four days after the United States Congress approved a bill that would fine companies supplying Iran with oil, although that bill has not been signed into law.

Several other oil companies have ended their operations in Iran, or are in the process of doing so, including, , , and others.


text:
User:ZooFari

Commons:User talk:ZooFari

title: User:ZooFari


text: Talk:European oil companies stop trade with Iran


text: Comments:European oil companies stop trade with Iran


text: User talk:CoughlinD

title: User talk:CoughlinD


text: User talk:OTHravens 7

title: User talk:OTHravens 7


text:
User talk:Georgey151~enwikinews

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Georgey151. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Georgey151~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:Georgey151~enwikinews


text: User talk:Sisnaymin

title: User talk:Sisnaymin


text:
Wikimedia Foundation addresses controversial content conflict

June 29, 2010The Wikimedia Foundation has taken action in response to last month's image controversy on their Commons project, requesting Executive Director Sue Gardner to examine the issue, and communicating with the wider community about their concerns.

Ms Gardner has hired fellow journalist and former broadcasting executive Robert Harris to carry out this study. Ms Gardner and Mr Harris worked together for seventeen years at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

In early May Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales deleted scores of images which were targeted as possible pornography, despite community resistance to the campaign. Wales eventually surrendered his rights to delete files, but the controversy over the perceived censorship caused many long-term contributors to rethink their involvement - some have curtailed the time they invest in the site while others have left the project entirely.

Commons Administrator Adam Cuerden expressed his frustration over the deletions when he spoke to Wikinews last month. "He [Wales] basically lied to us from the start. First, by acting as if this was for legal reasons. Second, by pretending he was listening to us, right up to his art deletion." The community irritation led to current efforts to draft a policy regarding sexual content for the site which hosts millions of openly-licensed media.

The Foundation's response is a measured one, according to Foundation Board of Trustees member Jan-Bart de Vreede. "The board thinks that this is an important issue," he told Wikinews yesterday, "we realise that there are many point of view on this. The one thing we don't want to do is draw hasty conclusions. We have therefore asked Sue to do more research into the matter. Our aim would be to get a complete picture of all the aspects and then see if we need next steps. If there are to be next steps, we will take these together with the community."


text: User talk:Tensplyr18

title: User talk:Tensplyr18


text: User talk:HGraphite

title: User talk:HGraphite


text:
Talk:Wikimedia Foundation addresses controversial content conflict

Original Reporting notes
All factual statements are drawn from the logs of Commons.Wikimedia.org, excepting the date Mr Wales's administrative rights were removed: no log entry has been found for this action either on Meta or on Commons. (That they do not currently exist was confirmed via Commons's User List.)

Quote from Adam Cuerden was drawn from an article draft. Quote from Jan-Bart was drawn from an Internet Relay Chat interview, the relevant section reproduced here (times PDT):

Original documents consulted are linked under sources.

-  Amgine | t 21:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Interview transcript
Would it be a good idea to post the interview transcript as well? It would be nice reading material for our audience. Benny the mascot (talk) 22:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Here is the relevant clip from the transcript of Diego Grez's interview with Adam Cuerden:

I imagine Diego's draft and notes will eventually be deleted. (He didn't date the interview, but he posted it on May 22.)

Amgine, do you have anything else from Jan-Bart to post in the talk page, such as the question you asked, or any on the record answers you chose not to include in the article?

--InfantGorilla (talk) 14:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I asked him if he would be willing to make an on-the-record comment regarding the release of the board resolution. Because the conversation up until that point was officially off the record, I cannot publish the discussions leading up to his statement. -  Amgine | t 14:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

@InfantGorilla There's no real need to delete the article I produced, after all, I would like to keep it for the record. Thanks! --Diego Grez return fire 22:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Children?
I have reviewed the article and it is fine to go except for one important question. From what I recall of the debate (and I mostly only read about images that were restored, not those that remain deleted), Jimmy Wales deleted a variety of explicit images, and age was rarely mentioned. If we can agree on another phrase that doesn't emphasise children, I recommend that a fellow reviewer goes ahead to publish it.
 * The article contains the phrase "images which were targeted as possible child-porn,".  Why the word "child"?

My suggestions: I don't mind which.
 * 1) a selection of explicit photographs and engravings
 * 2) images which he considered to have only pornographic uses
 * 3) possibly pornographic images

Otherwise, explain why the word "child" is useful, and re-review.

--InfantGorilla (talk) 14:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Although child-porn was ostensibly the impetus, you're right - that seems to have been part of the 'spin' added to this later. Mr Wales's initiating edit talks exclusively about sexual content, not specifically child-porn. (The larger story, of course, is the paedophilia accusations from Mr Sanger being promulgated by FOX news.) Go ahead and pull the 'child-' off that sentence. -  Amgine | t 14:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:Fenix down

title: User talk:Fenix down


text: User talk:Ciberclaw

title: User talk:Ciberclaw


text: User talk:Ryansheckler123

title: User talk:Ryansheckler123


text:
Thread:Comments:Fiji joins the Non-Aligned Movement/Comments from feedback form - "This is good for our country. ..."

This is good for our country. Australia and New Zealand's bullying tactics is anough..! Their economic hegemony is useless now, they can shove it up somewhere else...!!!


text: User talk:Centeroninternationalcooperation


text: User talk:Seywan

title: User talk:Seywan


text: User talk:Hairclips

title: User talk:Hairclips


text: User talk:TFOWR

title: User talk:TFOWR


text: File:Christy Turlington I'd rather go naked than wear fur.jpg


text:
File:600-restraint-tube4.jpg

 * From PETA commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/Images_in_Category:People_for_the_Ethical_Treatment_of_Animals

title: File:600-restraint-tube4.jpg


text: User talk:Ultrasroma1975

title: User talk:Ultrasroma1975


text:
Eleven alleged Russian spies arrested in US

June 29, 2010The United States announced the arrest of eleven people accused of acting as spies for Russia, breaking up what the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) called a "long term, deep cover" spy ring within the US.

Those arrested were, according to the US government, members of a spy ring that had existed for several years, involving Russian agents adopting civilian identities. All are charged with acting as unlawful agents for Russia, which carries a sentence of a prison term up to five years. Nine were charged with, a crime that carries a prison term of up to twenty years.

According to the US government, the suspects had been trained by the to obtain information about US military policies, including those concerned with nuclear weapons, as well as intelligence about leadership at the CIA and the White House.

The FBI said that to obtain those objectives, the suspects were instructed to live as American citizens under false names, some as married couples. Some suspects were able to achieve ties with prominent US citizens, including a scientist working with nuclear weapons and a New York financier who had ties to officials within the US government.

Communication with Russian authorities was allegedly via several disparate methods, including unique wireless internet connections or pictures posted on the Internet with hidden messages, as well as more traditional methods such as burying messages or swapping bags between agents.

The Russian Foreign Ministry told the AFP that they are investigating the allegations, but say that "there are a lot of contradictions." No further comment has been made.

Names of those accused
Names in quotes are cover names, while those not in quotes are real names of the alleged agents. Couples are on the same bullet, while those living alone are separate. Locations are where the suspects were arrested.

 * "Richard and Cynthia Murphy" (Montclair, New Jersey)
 * Vicky Paleaz (Yonkers, New York)
 * "Juan Lazaro" (Yonkers, New York)
 * Anna Chapman (Manhattan, New York City)
 * Mikhail Zemenko (Arlington, Virginia)
 * "Michael Zottoli" and "Patricia Mills" (Arlington, Virginia)
 * "Donald Howard Heathfield" and "Tracy Lee Ann Foley" (Boston, Massachusetts)
 * "Christopher R. Metsos" (Larnaca, Cyprus)

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for July 27.


text: User talk:Wallerson

title: User talk:Wallerson


text: User talk:Amorosky

title: User talk:Amorosky


text: User talk:Pavel.shmidt

title: User talk:Pavel.shmidt


text:
Wikinews:Arbitration Committee/2010 election

The Arbitration Committee is a community-elected group of users who may hold hearings in serious disputes that cannot otherwise be resolved by the community (through discussions or quick, generally temporary actions by administrators).

In general, ArbCom hearings are intended to be about whether core policies like NPOV and Wikiquette are followed. The members of ArbCom can decide whether or not they want to hear a particular case brought before them through Requests for arbitration. Be aware that arbitration duty can still be rather time-intensive in complex cases, and that you will be required to recuse yourself from cases you are involved in.

The community must agree on nomination procedures by July 9 and election procedures and election committee members by July 18. Nominations will be accepted July 10–19. Questions and comments may be made during that time period, but no voting shall take place. Voting will take place from July 20–30. Since the incumbent members' seats expire on July 31, the election committee must declare the winners by that date, and the new term begins on August 1.

The members of the election committee are:

Candidacy

 * All candidates must have an established, contributory, account on this project.
 * Members of the election committee are ineligible to run.

Voter eligibility

 * You must have at least 250 edits before July 1, 2010, 00:00 UTC to cast an eligible vote.
 * Your first main namespace edit must be prior to June 1, 2010, 00:00 UTC.
 * All Wikimedia Foundation board members, full-time staff, and paid developers are deemed eligible to vote, provided they have edited a Wikimedia wiki prior to June 1, 2010, 00:00 UTC in that capacity.
 * Administrators on this project are eligible to vote, even where they do not meet the above criteria.
 * Members of the election committee may only vote in exceptional cases (enumerated below).
 * Candidates may not vote for themselves.

How to vote

 * Eligible voters, per above criteria, should indicate support for the candidates they favour by using the support template in the relevant sub-section below.
 * The election is support-voting only. Any administrator, or election committee member, may strike oppose votes, abstentions, or comments not placed in the appropriate section.
 * Specific sections are provided for comments on, and questions to, candidates; such should be strictly limited to these sections.
 * Unsigned, ineligible, or IP votes may be struck by any administrator or election committee member.

Election results

 * Following the closure of voting, the six candidates with the highest number of eligible votes will form the new Arbitration Committee.
 * In the event of a tie, it is the responsibility of the election committee to schedule a run-off election, which should last not less than seven days. An interim Arbitration Committee will be formed with the clearly elected members.
 * Primary responsibility for the validation of votes, and their legitimacy, lies with the election committee.
 * The election committee is tasked with declaring the new members of the Arbitration Committee following the election, and any required run-off election(s).
 * All motions considered by the election committee must be approved by a simple majority of its members. All election committee members must be given clear notice and opportunity to comment, and vote, on a motion before the decision is finalized. Those not on the election committee may comment on any motion being considered by the committee.
 * If the incumbent Arbitration Committee is conducting business on July 31, then it will continue to serve as arbitrators until such business is concluded. The new Arbitration Committee will consider requests that are filed on or after August 1.

Community pre-approval of procedure
The community shall pre-approve by consensus the election procedures and the members of the election committee. Discussions should take place here.

Nominations and voting

 * /Nominations and voting
 * /Runoff

Questions for all candidates
/Questions

Election committee motions

 * /Judging
 * /cert


text:
Wikinews talk:Arbitration Committee/2010 election

Pre-approval
Ok, everyone. If you all choose to follow the schedule I've laid out, we have three days to finalize the election procedure and election committee members. So let's get started!

On a related note, I'm offering my services as election committee member. Are there any objections? Benny the mascot (talk) 04:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't object to your being a committee member ... now we just need to find another one. Maybe poke around on IRC for a second volunteer?

 * You've pretty much kept to last year's rules, I see, with the only difference being that this version employs oppose votes. In the past, we've had a straight support-only ballot, I'm not sure which is better. Tempodivalse [talk]  13:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 * FWIW, I also offer my services as an election committee member. Sincerely, Blurpeace  22:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll volunteer too... unless two's enough?  — fetch · comms  23:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I suppose we would need an odd number to eliminate the possibility of a tie. Is everyone ok with our set of election committee members? Benny the mascot (talk) 00:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I dislike the idea of having an oppose vote option. I'd rather see comments and questions; subsequently withholding your vote should be sufficient comment. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 00:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Brian on that matter. I also disagree with oppose Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 04:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with User:Brian McNeil and User:Brian New Zealand, there should not be a change this year to have "oppose" voting. -- Cirt (talk) 22:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Raise number of seats to seven?
After asking about a bit on IRC, I'd like to suggest we consider raising the number of seats on the committee to seven. There are several reasons for this: firstly, an odd number of seats will mean there is less chance of a tie in case. Secondly, the extra seat gives us more leeway in case some board members are absent or have to recuse themselves, etc., which isn't unlikely given our small userbase. I know the ArbCom isn't exactly bustling with activity, so this isn't that important, but it could nevertheless be useful. Open to thoughts. Tempodivalse [talk]  22:57, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. --Diego Grez return fire 23:10, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I cannot see any reason for not increasing the number; there are only benefits. Sincerely, Blurpeace  23:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support this proposal as well as a net positive.  — fetch · comms  23:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...do you think we can still have a competitive election? Benny the mascot (talk) 00:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably. I can think of a few users I'd like to nominate for the arbcom that could fill out the candidate list a bit. It doesn't have to be a really long ballot, if we can muster ten people for consideration, it should be enough of a choice. Tempodivalse [talk]  00:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Seven?!?! I agree, wholeheartedly, with the assumed intent (i.e. a pool of people unlikely to have been involved in disputes). So many, from such a small community; I do wonder if people with multi-project interest should have vote-eligibility criteria, or even options to be proposed as candidates. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account)  /alt-talk • main talk 00:55, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe we should lower the voting suffrage criteria, to say 100 edits (maybe with extra leeway given for someone who's an admin on other projects ... not sure about that though)? It would give us a larger voter pool. Tempodivalse [talk]  01:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It might help, though the current criteria is still pretty lax to me, but it is a small community (I wasn't eligible to vote on steward elections or Commons POTY this year :/).  — fetch · comms  01:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * How about we lower to 5 members instead. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, maybe, but then that would only make it more problematic IMHO if the committee is reduced to four or three members due to recusals. Having the extra seat gives us a buffer. Tempodivalse [talk]  12:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * - Keep it at six seats. User:Brian McNeil is correct, below, that this process seems a tad bit rushed. Combining that with making changes to the outcome procedure, seemingly at the last minute, has the potential to exacerbate things. -- Cirt (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * IMO, there aren't enough people to get 7 active users on a committee, and have good candidates. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:04, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose/support votes?
In the past, ArbCom elections were run on a support-only basis, with opposers simply not voting (and a tiebreaker vote in case of a tie). I kind of prefer that over the current suggestion, it seems to mimic a real election more. Tempodivalse [talk]  00:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Echoes my sentiments above exactly, Tempo. I'd far rather have people putting difficult questions, then declining to vote, than a popularity contest. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 00:58, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * IMO, having people indicate their opposition gives us a better idea of who is favored more. But if you'd like to change the procedure, go right ahead. Benny the mascot (talk) 01:02, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I think that the benefit of an oppose is, as Benny said, who is favored more. But simply leaving comments should be fine, and I would support only supports and comments rather than have an oppose.  — fetch · comms  01:30, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Is the new procedure acceptable? Benny the mascot (talk) 01:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me. Tempodivalse [talk]  01:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah okay, looks good. -- Cirt (talk) 22:31, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Too rushed

 * 1) I am quite concerned that, with less than 48 hrs to resolve this, it has seen little input from the established community. I want an ArbCom in place, vigorously opposed shelving it last elections, but want to see it a usable facet of the project. I would, hastily, propose deferring the fixing-in-stone of process for at least another seven days.
 * 2) Is there, practically, enough gap between first edit, and eligibility?
 * 3) What criteria are people looking for here? Solomon offered to cut the disputed child in half to resolve a parental dispute; are we burdening people with such responsibility to threaten destruction?
 * 4) Are we expecting people to be permitted to self-nominate?

I genuinely hope to see ArbCom established for another term, and sit idle. I also expect those elected to, if needed, pull people out of disruptive bickering and help them formulate an appeal to to ArbCom, and articulate their dispute. I also want to see those elected prepared to issue instructions to project CUs and Oversighters to be more proactive. Mainstream news sources are going to be looking more to erect paywalls. Here, the project reputation depends on sticking to standards they might have found noble 40-50 years ago.

I've a couple of people I want to nominate, but I even intend to ask them probing questions. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 00:45, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Yeah, the proposal hasn't seen a lot of comments. At the same time though, the seats are all due to expire in a month, so we'll probably have to extend the existing committee's terms for a few extra days to fit everything in (which shouldn't be a problem given its inactivity). Or, as an alternative, perhaps we could leave the proposals open for comment while at the same time accepting nominations? The actual voting won't start for another few weeks anyway.

 * I think people should be allowed to self-nominate to encourage as large a choice of candidates as possible, especially if we're going to expand the committee to seven seats. Last time we had eight candidates for six slots, which isn't as much variety as I'd like to see. Tempodivalse [talk]  01:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we can finalize candidate requirements now and keep discussing voting rules for another two weeks. Would that work? Benny the mascot (talk) 02:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

 * It will, for me at least, be influential should people have self-nominated. Surely would-be candidates can find one well-established contributor to take the time to consider their desire to serve, and on-project history.
 * I would not lower suffrage reqirements from those previously set. Nor would I significantly increase membership. To counter concern that escalation to ArbCom comes after a quorum can be reached with uninvolved members, I would prefer co-opting stewards, or 'crats with experience on smaller projects.
 * I would like at least another 48 hours before candidates get put forward. In contrast to the self-nom above, my ideal would be a proposer and second. It would be a bit uncomfortable to see any candidate unable to raise at least two votes.

 * I'm now going to go over the current page version very carefully. We're effectively choosing the project's equivalent to the BBC Trust. Perhaps it should not be called ArbCom at all? -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 23:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I opined on the Water Cooler that there was no rush for the elections, and agree that there has been haste where there is no need. I'd much prefer that we took a little more time to think things through, rather than set unnecessarily short deadlines for something that actually requires a little thought (note the use of understatement here). WRT self-nominations, this is not actually new, as BRS self-nominated last year. --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 11:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Need for urgent, thoughtful, review
Changes...

 * To come back to my uneasiness over this, and a lack of input I have questions, and partially formed concerns over what almost seems a too straightforward process to put people in powerful positions.

 * 1) Edit dates and states.
 * This proposal allows for someone with one edit a few months ago, and 249 in the last week to stand. Can I appeal for an amendment of that? Main namespace, unreverted, edits are important to me.
 * 1) The election committee.
 * This is mildly disconcerting. And, I'm glad I stepped down from ArbCom. Any disputes or accusations of sock voting should be taken into consideration.

As I said, I do not thing this is well enough considerered. I deeply dislike being presented with an apparent fait-acomplit. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 23:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * We're basically using the same rules as last year... what exactly do you want to change and how? If I understad the time conversions correctly, it is now July 2 in UTC time, so you therefore have 24 hours to gather consensus to change the nomination procedures or to postpone the nominations period. Benny the mascot (talk) 00:06, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

 * 1) The rules from last year are,... Where? Show me a diff.
 * 2) There is a huge gap between last comment on Wikinews talk:Arbitration Committee and my much-later, unresponded-to, resignation. Thus, fait-accomplit is a most-apt term for this.
 * 3) You do realise that, local time here is ~0130 BST? I must work 8.5 hours tomorrow, spend circa 4 hours travelling, and sleep before doing so?
 * I think my concerns are valid, and I am disconcerted that weak echoes are not being appropriately considered. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 00:28, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Last year's election rules are here. You will see that the rules are left mostly untouched. If you have an issue with the voting procedures, then you have two weeks to change them. Candidacy rules are going to be locked in place in less than 23 hours. IMO the nominations procedure isn't too controversial -- anyone with an account can run for election. Those candidates that we feel aren't qualified simply won't be elected. Benny the mascot (talk) 01:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If you lock those rules at that specified time, you can expect me to raise it with the now-sitting ArbCom. I am leaving for work shortly, I may not be able to appropriately review the link you have posted until I get home with one hour before your deadline. I strongly suggest you review the actual ArbCom talk page, delays and deferments have taken place in the past. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 09:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * - I agree with User:Brian McNeil and with User:AlexandrDmitri, above. There is no big rush for elections to occur, and waiting a few days or even a couple weeks or so, with defaulting to the prior members until then, will not cause the sky to fall down. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 14:04, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

 * My quick comment having skimmed over the discussion here, is that it doesn't really matter what the criteria are for nomination in practice. If people without many edits or experience are nominated, then they won't get any votes.  If candidates are self-nominating, then so be it, but those who are voting are going to be looking a lot harder at them as to why they couldn't muster up a vote/nomination from anyone.  In the end, it's down to the voting and most people around here aren't stupid and will be able to see who is responsible enough to be on the committee.  I oppose increasing the numbers anymore-although the idea is the right idea, seven is far too many to have on a top committee when you look at how many contributors we have.      Tris   16:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I'd suggest holding off elections. It isn't as if there is any harm in letting the long idle ArbCom have a few more weeks while last minute discussion knits off the loose ends. Sincerely, Blurpeace  16:36, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I am also very concerned that ArbCom election discussions have just popped up out of nowhere. Realx, guys. There's no deadline to speak of; ArbCom has been unused for years - does it hurt to take some more time to do it properly? Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:13, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, doesn't hurt to wait. Someone just remember to disable the sitenotices if it is delayed.  — fetch · comms  21:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I can see that the numerous notices I've put up haven't been taken down yet, so shall I assume that the nominations period has already begun? :/ Personally I still don't see what the exact concerns are; could someone please articulate them? Benny the mascot (talk) 04:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Look Up. "Postponed" is the word you're looking for in the sitenotice. The desperation to push this through was bordering on project disruption as far as I was concerned. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 09:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...for some reason I can't see the site notices. Perhaps something is wrong with my browser... As for the election schedule, what do you propose? WN:ARBCOM mandates that the election be held in July, and that the seats be filled by August 1. I suppose consensus overrides policy in this case, but what was the purpose of postponing nominations when you're not even explaining what's wrong with the candidacy rules? We've already established that self-noms have been accepted before, and that in a practical sense, candidacy rules don't even matter that much! Benny the mascot (talk) 13:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * With ArbCom perpetually idle, and recent events, it seemed particularly ill-judged to push this through at this time. I will have time in a couple of days to look this over more carefully and put a few points up for consideration – essentially, a synopsis of what I brought up above. I do note you've been making a few edits subsequent to concerns regarding this, I'm happy to see that. However, I think it is important there is a suitably long timescale that people who were here when the ArbCom needed set up (in the face of on-project warring) can weigh in on the issue. -- Brian McNeil (alt. account) /alt-talk • main talk 14:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Formal arrangements?
So the page right now says The community must agree on nomination procedures by July 9 and election procedures and election committee members by July 18. Nominations will be accepted July 10–19. Questions and comments may be made during that time period, but no voting shall take place. Voting will take place from July 20–30. Since the incumbent members' seats expire on July 31, the election committee must declare the winners by that date, and the new term begins on August 1. What exactly still needs agreeing upon in the procedures? Also, who has volunteered to be on the election committee, and how will that be finalized? Thank you,  — fetch · comms  21:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not exactly sure what we still need to discuss regarding the procedures. So far, you, me, and Blurpeace are on the election committee, and since nobody has objected or volunteered to join us, then I think there's no need to formally "finalize" anything. Benny the mascot (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, that's all I needed to know. Thanks,  — fetch · comms  23:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

General questions section
Is the general questions section really necessary? While it certainly is convenient for those posing questions to all candidates, the candidates themselves are asked to respond in multiple subsections, breaking up their statements and making it harder for voters to easily follow everything being said. Benny the mascot (talk) 18:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This mirrors the WP-style format more. I don't think either way is that great, but having a general subsection is more economical overall because the same question doesn't have to be repeated over and over again. Tempodivalse [talk]  18:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Judges asking questions
What do you guys feel about judges asking questions during the nominations phase? I can't speak for my fellow election committee members, but I intend to ask every candidate a question. Since Brian objected to this on my talk page, I'd like to see what people think. Benny the mascot (talk) 00:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really see anything wrong with it. You're not going to vote, after all, and can still remain impartial ... Tempodivalse [talk]  00:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I already asked one before seeing this, but I don't find anything wrong with it either.  — fetch · comms  18:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I do not find it is wrong if it is to all candidates. That is not what Benny did, and was the precise reason why I challenged him on the issue. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

My absence
I will be absent during the elections, starting from within hours and lasting about a month. There are no users I actively oppose, although the fact that Tempo is often involved in disputes concerns me a little (then again, that never stopped me being on ArbCom). I would greatly appreciate it if this comment be taken as a for Pi zero and Bawolff, as they strike me as the two candidates who stand out above the others. I daresay Benny might view that as out of process; but do please consider this request. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 10:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit uneasy about this...this will have to go before the election committee when it convenes. :/ Benny the mascot (talk) 21:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * When is that, btw? I unfortunately will be without any Internet access whatsoever starting this Sunday, July 18, until next Saturday, July 24. If my presence is necessary on the election committee during that time (the actual voting starts July 20, so I will only be around for the second half of it), I will resign as a member of the committee so the election may proceed more smoothly (I hope). If this isn't an issue, then I will gladly stay on board and offer my services when I can. I'm extremely sorry for the late notice, as I didn't realize I would be gone during this time until very recently. Thanks,  — fetch · comms  23:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't be a problem, I think. We step in and judge the election near the end, around July 30. Benny the mascot (talk) 01:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, that's good with me.  — fetch · comms  01:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Another absence
As with BRS above, I will be absent with sporadic internet access for the next month and would appreciate the election committee taking this comment as for Pi zero, Bawolff, Skenmy and Cirt. I don't oppose any of the candidates, all of whom would do a great job. This may also hamper my ability to answer questions, and for that I apologise and will do my best. Cheers!   Tris   23:34, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

How many votes?
Should how to vote instructions tell us how many votes we have each? (Six?) --InfantGorilla (talk) 07:10, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Since it wasn't specified when voting opened, I'd think changing it now would be the sort of thing the election committee exists to prevent. I see no difficulty with the current arrangement.  --Pi zero (talk) 12:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

 * What is the current arrangement? How many votes do I have? --InfantGorilla (talk) 13:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

 * If I understand correctly, there aren't any limits and you can vote for as many people as you want - even everybody (a few people did this last year). Tempodivalse [talk]  13:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Approval voting means you vote for everyone you approve of. This can be important for WMF privacy policy requirements; I believe the requirement is 25 votes to indicate community support. -  Amgine | t 15:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I am confused
Question moved from Wikinews talk:Arbitration Committee/2010 election/Nominations and voting

I am confused, how many times can you vote and why are election committee members able to vote? BKCW8''' talk  06:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) See above for how to vote.
 * 2) I don't know; it doesn't sound right: "Members of the election committee may only vote in exceptional cases (enumerated below)." I don't see any exceptions enumerated, and I don't see any votes from committee members.
 * --InfantGorilla (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

 * My guess is that the "exceptional cases (enumerated below)" refers to the fact that, although the election committee are never allowed to vote for candidates, they would vote on "motions considered by the election committee". It sounds like legacy phrasing, though.  --Pi zero (talk) 13:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, election committee members do vote on motions, but not on specific candidates. Benny the mascot (talk) 13:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I think I know what happened. When I first wrote the rules for the election, I allowed the election committee to break ties. However, after a few users objected to other portions of the rules, I removed the election committee's tiebreaking powers but forgot to amend the "exceptional cases" part. In any case, the election committee still votes on certain things, such as appeals and the final election results. Benny the mascot (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

you vote on the final election results!? LOL What's the point of having an ArbCom election if you just "pick" who wins anyway...If I am interpreting your words correctly,I am offended over the time and concern I have wasted over this election. Why can't we instead of approving an election committe and allowing that committe to then approve the ArbCom, just vote for a wikinews legislature (with me as Governor-General holding executive powers =D) to govern!? Gee Whizz... or we could just accept the out right vote of the people as those who win the ArbCom elections and be done with it, leaving the election committee to just oversee that the election goes smoothly? - There is a Cabal and its name is The Election Committee!BKCW8''' talk  11:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think "vote" is really the right word for what the election committee will do with the final results, "endorse" or "certify" might be more appropriate. They're just there to make sure the elections go smoothly, and independently check that there aren't any irregularities. Hopefully not something we should need, given the small scale of our elections, but nice to have anyway. the wub "?!"  11:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

why do they need to certify anything...the people want X on the ArbCom and therefore they should get X regardless of what Y thinks BKCW8''' talk  11:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

 * p.s Endorse is a better word, but he didn't say that BKCW8''' talk  11:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

 * There are always questions that come up. There needs to be a clear way to decide them, so that there's no ambiguity about the results of the election.  (Just as a fer-instance, note the two requests on this talk page to register in advance votes to be counted in the final tally.  There's always something.)  We're using an election committee for the purpose.  Trying to conduct a community-wide consensus discussion over each such question, besides the problem of non-termination (with each decision of the community requiring another decision of the community to certify its predecessor), is going to lead to politicalization of questions of process.  Putting that much power in the hands of one person is preposterous for a wiki, and independently preposterous for a site dedicated to a neutral free press.  An election committee that does not vote has a high degree of resistance to politicalization:  the community watches the conduct of the committee, and everyone (both on the committee and in the community at large) understands that what we expect of the committee is objectivity.  --Pi zero (talk) 12:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Why is Tempo's nom archived?
Maybe I missed something, but Tempo didn't withdraw, and the election isn't over, so why is the nomination archive-ed? --Thunderhead (t - e - c) 04:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Tempo withdrew (and left the project unfortunately). Bawolff ☺☻ 04:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Voter eligibility
Do the 250 edits have to have been made on Wikinews? As opposed to other English projects? I know it probably does, but I'm just checking as it's not so clear. Bydand (talk) 03:47, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I don't know (but I agree it probably does). However (1) voting closed yesterday, there will be a run-off shortly, and (2) you are disqualified under another criterion: Your first main namespace edit must be prior to June 1, 2010, 00:00 UTC.  Hope that helps, and welcome to English Wikinews.  --InfantGorilla (talk) 12:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Oh ok, thanks for your reply, and thanks for the welcome :) Bydand (talk) 03:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Site notices
We spammed the site with 'vote now' messages.

I pulled them down from and I also updated Template:Wn news.
 * 1) MediaWiki:Sitenotice
 * 2) MediaWiki:Watchlist-details
 * 3) Template:Votings

Please fix any I missed. I guess the committee can put run-off notices in those places when it is arranged.

--InfantGorilla (talk) 07:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

runoff election
So...how do you guys want to run the runoff election? Shall we have everyone vote again, but this time just for one candidate? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

 * For the sake of convenience the votes are a follows:

 * - 17
 * - 13
 * - 12
 * - 12
 * - 10
 * - 9
 * - 9
 * - 8
 * - 6

— Mike moral  ♪♫  03:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Place for questions and comments?
Where do runoff questions and comments go?

I would like to ask a question in public. (Actually I would like to ask Brian to consider answering the hustings question that Skenmy answered and he didn't. Also I want to post my vote rationale).

--InfantGorilla (talk) 07:18, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


text: Comments:Jimmie Johnson wins 2010 Lenox Industrial Tools 301 NASCAR race in New Hampshire


text: User talk:Tf2010r249

title: User talk:Tf2010r249


text: User talk:Balin Fredericks

title: User talk:Balin Fredericks


text: User talk:Bhush.r28

title: User talk:Bhush.r28


text:
Australian Foreign Minister condemns Fiji media decree

July 1, 2010

Australia's Foreign Minister has publically condemned the Fiji Media Decree which went into effect Monday. The decree, the full title of which is "The Media Industry Development Decree 2010", implements restrictions on foreign media ownership and jail terms for journalists whose work violates the "public interest or order". The decree also introduces a new media code and complaints authority.

Various news, media and press coroporations, including News Limited have been handed a sanction by the military controlled government, under to sell or close 90% of their Fijian branches. The mandate also extends to imprisoning journalist who are deemed against "public order".

“For the first time we have a legislation that is all encompassing (the media journalists and consumers), it’s actually empowering the people of Fiji in ensuring that their views are heard,” said Sharron Smith-Johns.

Smith said these actions are another example of the Pacific nation's military rulers disregarding the civil rights of its people, and would likely result in financial and economic backlash.

"We worry very much that this arbitrary move sends a very bad signal as far as future investment in Fiji is concerned, let alone the very bad signal it sends in terms of freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and democratic rights," he said.

Four years after ousting the former democratically elected Qarase government, the sanction entitled 'The Media Industry Development Decree 2010' follows strings of intimidation of reporters by soldiers, deportation of foreign new media executives and censorship of "negative" stories about the current military administration. Attorney-General of Fiji claims that foreign media outlets are "purveyors of negativity", an argument that the entire administration defends.

Chairman of News Limited, John Hartigan has criticised former Prime Ministers John Howard and Kevin Rudd of Australia, for not pressuring the military leaders of Fiji into holding elections. Fiji is currently suspended from the for the same reasons.


text: User talk:Garishest

title: User talk:Garishest


text:
Thread:Comments:Fuel leak prompts 17,000-vehicle recall by Toyota/Great

Serves them right.


text: User talk:Btbd 378

title: User talk:Btbd 378


text: User talk:Lab-Rat

title: User talk:Lab-Rat


text: User talk:AaliyahStar

title: User talk:AaliyahStar


text: User talk:A Tejesember

title: User talk:A Tejesember


text: User talk:Tutankanara63

title: User talk:Tutankanara63


text: User talk:WerawutPhornchaisit

title: User talk:WerawutPhornchaisit


text: User talk:Nouregypt

title: User talk:Nouregypt


text: User talk:Randomymous

title: User talk:Randomymous


text: User talk:Chrsgorden

title: User talk:Chrsgorden


text: User talk:Aabidalir

title: User talk:Aabidalir


text: User talk:Sandrino 14

title: User talk:Sandrino 14


text: User talk:Planet2010

title: User talk:Planet2010


text: User talk:Ahmad7447

title: User talk:Ahmad7447


text: User talk:Olytibar

title: User talk:Olytibar


text: User talk:PA.TheOne

title: User talk:PA.TheOne


text: User talk:Mastermindbj

title: User talk:Mastermindbj


text: User talk:Siddharth gyani

title: User talk:Siddharth gyani


text: User talk:Johny11123

title: User talk:Johny11123


text: User talk:Jennidix92

title: User talk:Jennidix92


text: User talk:Mskgt

title: User talk:Mskgt


text: User talk:BurgertB

title: User talk:BurgertB


text: User talk:Hodhod222

title: User talk:Hodhod222


text: Talk:Australian Prime Minister announces new cabinet


text: Comments:Australian Prime Minister announces new cabinet


text: User talk:Rahmatgee

title: User talk:Rahmatgee


text: User talk:ANIL TAGALE

title: User talk:ANIL TAGALE


text: User talk:Ion hars

title: User talk:Ion hars


text: User talk:Hoo man

title: User talk:Hoo man


text: User talk:Prakz

title: User talk:Prakz


text:
Thread:Comments:US scientist creates 'artificial life'/Comments from feedback form - "Nice, concise, executive summa..."

Nice, concise, executive summary on an interesting bit of news.


text: User talk:Brookie

title: User talk:Brookie


text: User talk:Goldafisch

title: User talk:Goldafisch


text: User talk:Nouman915

title: User talk:Nouman915


text: User talk:Phungbadai

title: User talk:Phungbadai


text: User talk:Dxlwgft

title: User talk:Dxlwgft


text: User talk:Danielefinta

title: User talk:Danielefinta


text: User talk:Kvorakir

title: User talk:Kvorakir


text: User talk:Thenutintheushanka

title: User talk:Thenutintheushanka


text: User talk:Asadjaved0

title: User talk:Asadjaved0


text:
User talk:Maoriii~enwikinews

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Maoriii~enwikinews


text: User talk:Rahulvish

title: User talk:Rahulvish


text: User talk:Jennyrod

title: User talk:Jennyrod


text: User talk:Audiophile81

title: User talk:Audiophile81


text: User talk:Rabah Madjer

title: User talk:Rabah Madjer


text:
Thread:Comments:Australian Prime Minister announces new cabinet/Oh, ffs...

Why the hell didn't she dump Stephen Conroy and his shitty internet censorship filter plan?


text: Comments:Wikimedia Foundation addresses controversial content conflict


text:
Thread:Comments:European oil companies stop trade with Iran/Western mobbing

Mobbing, blackmailing, economic war with ones that do not think same as they do.


text: User talk:Divyakkiran

title: User talk:Divyakkiran


text: Talk:Eleven alleged Russian spies arrested in US


text: Comments:Ten alleged Russian spies arrested in US


text: User talk:STP87

title: User talk:STP87


text: User talk:Karmainstante

title: User talk:Karmainstante


text: User talk:Eve

title: User talk:Eve


text: User talk:Юрий питель

title: User talk:Юрий питель


text: User talk:Nongtienlu

title: User talk:Nongtienlu


text: User talk:Baojie

title: User talk:Baojie


text: User talk:Azhandy

title: User talk:Azhandy


text:
Thread:Comments:Ten alleged Russian spies arrested in US/Spais!

They're everywhere. Don't Trust anyone.


text: User talk:JCAla

title: User talk:JCAla


text: User talk:Rafamaio

title: User talk:Rafamaio


text:
Czech train derails, at least one dead

June 29, 2010 According to media reports, at least one person was killed and several more were injured when a train derailed in the Czech Republic yesterday. The incident occurred near in the north of the country. As a result of the crash, the train was seriously damaged. At least six people were injured with wounds of varying seriousness, all of which were hospitalised; conflicting media reports, however, suggested that the number of hurt passengers was substantially more. According to Czech media, the dead man was the train's driver.

According to the press-secretary of the local fire department, the train went off the rails a few hundred metres from the station.

Preliminary investigation has revealed that the train derailed when crossing a 58 km/h faster than authorized. The safe speed limit is 120 km/h when the switch, also known as a turnout or a set of points, is set to a straight path, and 50 km/h when the switch is set to divert the train to another track. In this case, the switch was set to divert, but the train's speed is reported to have been 108 km/h.

The accident happened on one of the most important railroads in the country, which is double-tracked, electrified and used daily by long-distance international trains. Therefore it is checked often, and investigators consider track failure to be improbable. Investigators have ruled out malfunction. Media reports suggest two possible reasons for the derailment: driver's error or.

Train operations on the line from Ústí nad Labem to the capital Prague had to be cancelled as a result of the crash.

title: Czech train derails, at least one dead


text: User talk:Taba52134

title: User talk:Taba52134


text: User talk:Pjsr.04

title: User talk:Pjsr.04


text: User talk:C. lorenz

title: User talk:C. lorenz


text: User talk:Bmac2984

title: User talk:Bmac2984


text: User talk:Nmaskiell

title: User talk:Nmaskiell


text:
User talk:Dandv

Tempodivalse [talk]  20:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dandv


text:
User:Dandv

Please see my Wikipedia page.

title: User:Dandv


text: User talk:Mariemegueye

title: User talk:Mariemegueye


text: User talk:Pyro721

title: User talk:Pyro721


text:
User talk:82.132.248.86

Thanks for experimenting with Wikinews. Your test worked, and has now been reverted or removed. Please use Sandbox for any other tests you want to do, since testing in articles may disrupt the site's working and will be reverted quickly. Thank you. Tempodivalse [talk]  20:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:82.132.248.86


text:
Thread:Comments:Ten alleged Russian spies arrested in US/Spais!/reply

THAT POSTER IS A SPY


text:
Thread:Comments:Large fireball observed after object strikes Jupiter/Comments from feedback form - "There seems to be an error on ..."

There seems to be an error on the first paragraph where it says "It could be the first time someone has recorded a meteor crashing into a planet." there was a recorded event long before this one called the shoemaker levy comet that hit Jupiter in 1995


text:
Talk:Czech train derails, at least one dead

Preliminary investigation
Tchoř of Wikinews kindly wrote a couple of extra paragraphs, and added some Czech language sources. Nobody copy-edited or flagged them in 15 hours, so I reverted them as I think they are too much too late for a published article, and belong instead in a future article. --InfantGorilla (talk) 11:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the limit for a published article is 24 hours for new info, which Tchor's edits didn't surpass. I reverted, as I think the info is quite relevant here and we need more information to help fill the article out more. I left it unsighted for now, but will try to struggle through the sources with my limited knowledge of Czech to fact-check it later on. Tempodivalse [talk]  13:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Conceded. 7 hours left, but the info won't be stale for a new article.  When you fact-check, could you add who conducted the preliminary investigation please? (police, railway operator, safety authority?) --InfantGorilla (talk) 13:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia link
Mjroots wrote: "re-adding link to Wikipedia article. Why was this deleted? I thought such links were encouraged.". It was a duplicate, (and the target was unclear imho). --InfantGorilla (talk) 08:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

For English readers
For those of us that like to read confirmation of the basics from a 2nd English source, AP/CP ran it on Tuesday. It is very short. --InfantGorilla (talk) 10:37, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Canada's Windsor Star passed on a little distressing detail from an unnamed wire service: "firefighter Lukas Marvan said (that) It flipped onto its side and slammed into a concrete wall which ripped open the first carriage, he said, adding that it was not yet known what had caused the crash." (June 29) --InfantGorilla (talk) 13:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


text: Comments:Czech train derails, at least one dead


text: User talk:Lu.bizhuta

title: User talk:Lu.bizhuta


text: User talk:Ghengis123

title: User talk:Ghengis123


text:
Comments:The Future of Democracy in Pakistan

Comments from feedback form - "this is good and more informat..."
this is good and more informative for students —119.152.137.41 (talk) 21:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


text: User talk:Julio300796

title: User talk:Julio300796


text: Category:Abortion

title: Category:Abortion


text:
Talk:US Senator Robert Byrd dies at age 92

Edit
editprotected Another correction-worthy error. I don't see any mention of the Supreme Court in the sources, and in any event, Byrd was most definitely not the only senator to oppose either Marshall or Thomas: per Wikipedia's sources, 11 senators voted against Marshall and 48 against Thomas. Heavy Water (talk) 21:56, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * ❌ Of the eleven who voted against Marshall, only two (besides Byrd) were still in the Senate at the time of Thomas' nomination. The two nominations were 24 years apart, afterall. The two were  and . I confirmed they both voted yea on Thomas. So Byrd was indeed the only senator to vote nay on both. I do not know where the author sourced this information (I can't read the NYT source). --SVTCobra 10:05, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ohhh, only senator to vote no on both. Perhaps that sentence ought to have had "both" in it. Oh well. Thanks, Heavy Water (talk) 13:34, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


text: Comments:US Senator Robert Byrd dies at age 92


text: User talk:MichaelBestCooper

title: User talk:MichaelBestCooper


text:
Category:July 1, 2010

es:Categoría:1 de julio de 2010 eo:Kategorio:1-a de julio 2010 fr:Catégorie:1er juillet 2010 it:Categoria:1 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月1日 no:Kategori:1. juli 2010 pl:Kategoria:1 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:1 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:1 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:1. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:1. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 1, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月1日

title: Category:July 1, 2010


text:
Category:July 2010

bs:Kategorija:Juli 2010 ca:Categoria:Juliol del 2010 cs:Kategorie:Červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:Juli 2010 es:Categoría:Julio de 2010 eo:Kategorio:Julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:Juillet 2010 ko:분류:2010년 7월 it:Categoria:Luglio 2010 hu:Kategória:2010. július ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月 pl:Kategoria:Lipiec 2010 pt:Categoria:Julho de 2010 ro:Categorie:Iulie 2010 ru:Категория:Июль 2010 sr:Категорија:Јул 2010. fi:Luokka:Heinäkuu 2010 sv:Kategori:Juli 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 2010 tr:Kategori:2010/07 uk:Категорія:Липень 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月

title: Category:July 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/1

 category=Published category=July 1, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/1


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/1

 category=July 1, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/1


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/1

 category=July 1, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/1


text:
Category:July 2, 2010

cs:Kategorie:2. červenec 2010 es:Categoría:2 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:2 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:2 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月2日 pl:Kategoria:2 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:2 de julho de 2010 ro:Categorie:2 iulie 2010 ru:Категория:2 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:2. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:2. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 2, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月2日

title: Category:July 2, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/2

 category=Published category=July 2, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/2


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/2

 category=July 2, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/2


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/2

 category=July 2, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/2


text:
Category:July 3, 2010

de:Kategorie:03.07.2010 es:Categoría:3 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:3 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:3 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月3日 pl:Kategoria:3 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:3 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:3. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:3. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 3, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月3日

title: Category:July 3, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/3

 category=Published category=July 3, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/3


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/3

 category=July 3, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/3


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/3

 category=July 3, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/3


text:
Category:July 4, 2010

ar:تصنيف:4 يوليو 2010 es:Categoría:4 de julio de 2010 eo:Kategorio:4-a de julio 2010 fr:Catégorie:4 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:4 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月4日 pl:Kategoria:4 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:4 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:4. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:4. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 4, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月4日

title: Category:July 4, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/4

 category=Published category=July 4, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/4


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/4

 category=July 4, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/4


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/4

 category=July 4, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/4


text:
Category:July 5, 2010

ca:Categoria:5 de juliol de 2010 cs:Kategorie:5. červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:05.07.2010 es:Categoría:5 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:5 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:5 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月5日 pl:Kategoria:5 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:5 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:5 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:5. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:5. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 5, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月5日

title: Category:July 5, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/5

 category=Published category=July 5, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/5


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/5

 category=July 5, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/5


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/5

 category=July 5, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/5


text:
Category:July 6, 2010

ca:Categoria:6 de juliol del 2010 cs:Kategorie:6. červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:06.07.2010 es:Categoría:6 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:6 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:6 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月6日 pl:Kategoria:6 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:6 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:6. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:6. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 6, 2010 tr:Kategori:2010/07/06 zh:Category:2010年7月6日

title: Category:July 6, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/6

 category=Published category=July 6, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/6


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/6

 category=July 6, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/6


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/6

 category=July 6, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/6


text:
Category:July 7, 2010

cs:Kategorie:7. červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:07.07.2010 es:Categoría:7 de julio de 2010 eo:Kategorio:7-a de julio 2010 fr:Catégorie:7 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:7 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月7日 pl:Kategoria:7 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:7 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:7 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:7. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:7. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 7, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月7日

title: Category:July 7, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/7

 category=Published category=July 7, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/7


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/7

 category=July 7, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/7


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/7

 category=July 7, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/7


text:
Category:July 8, 2010

cs:Kategorie:8. červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:08.07.2010 es:Categoría:8 de julio de 2010 eo:Kategorio:8-a de julio 2010 fr:Catégorie:8 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:8 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月8日 pl:Kategoria:8 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:8 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:8 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:8. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:8. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 8, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月8日

title: Category:July 8, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/8

 category=Published category=July 8, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/8


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/8

 category=July 8, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/8


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/8

 category=July 8, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/8


text:
Category:July 9, 2010

cs:Kategorie:9. červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:09.07.2010 es:Categoría:9 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:9 juillet 2010 ko:분류:2010년 7월 9일 it:Categoria:9 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月9日 pl:Kategoria:9 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:9 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:9 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:9. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:9. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 9, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月9日

title: Category:July 9, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/9

 category=Published category=July 9, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/9


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/9

 category=July 9, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/9


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/9

 category=July 9, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/9


text:
Category:July 10, 2010

bs:Kategorija:10. juli 2010 cs:Kategorie:10. červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:10.07.2010 es:Categoría:10 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:10 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:10 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月10日 no:Kategori:10. juli 2010 pl:Kategoria:10 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:10 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:10. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:10. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 10, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月10日

title: Category:July 10, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/10

 category=Published category=July 10, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/10


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/10

 category=July 10, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/10


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/10

 category=July 10, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/10


text:
Category:July 11, 2010

cs:Kategorie:11. červenec 2010 es:Categoría:11 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:11 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:11 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月11日 pl:Kategoria:11 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:11 de julho de 2010 ro:Categorie:11 iulie 2010 ru:Категория:11 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:11. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:11. heinäkuuta 2010 sv:Kategori:11 juli 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 11, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月11日

title: Category:July 11, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/11

 category=Published category=July 11, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/11


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/11

 category=July 11, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/11


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/11

 category=July 11, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/11


text:
Category:July 12, 2010

es:Categoría:12 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:12 juillet 2010 ko:분류:2010년 7월 12일 it:Categoria:12 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月12日 pl:Kategoria:12 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:12 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:12. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:12. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 12, 2010 tr:Kategori:2010/07/12 uk:Категорія:12 липня 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月12日

title: Category:July 12, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/12

 category=Published category=July 12, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/12


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/12

 category=July 12, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/12


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/12

 category=July 12, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/12


text:
Category:July 13, 2010

cs:Kategorie:13. červenec 2010 de:Kategorie:13.07.2010 es:Categoría:13 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:13 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:13 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月13日 pl:Kategoria:13 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:13 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:13 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:13. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:13. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 13, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月13日

title: Category:July 13, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/13

 category=Published category=July 13, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/13


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/13

 category=July 13, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/13


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/13

 category=July 13, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/13


text:
Category:July 14, 2010

bg:Категория:Новини от 14 юли 2010 г. es:Categoría:14 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:14 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:14 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月14日 pl:Kategoria:14 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:14 de julho de 2010 ro:Categorie:14 iulie 2010 ru:Категория:14 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:14. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:14. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 14, 2010 uk:Категорія:14 липня 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月14日

title: Category:July 14, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/14

 category=Published category=July 14, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/14


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/14

 category=July 14, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/14


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/14

 category=July 14, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/14


text:
Category:July 15, 2010

cs:Kategorie:15. červenec 2010 es:Categoría:15 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:15 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:15 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月15日 pl:Kategoria:15 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:15 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:15. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:15. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 15, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月15日

title: Category:July 15, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/15

 category=Published category=July 15, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/15


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/15

 category=July 15, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/15


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/15

 category=July 15, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/15


text:
Category:July 16, 2010

cs:Kategorie:16. červenec 2010 es:Categoría:16 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:16 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:16 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月16日 pl:Kategoria:16 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:16 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:16 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:16. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:16. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 16, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月16日

title: Category:July 16, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/16

 category=Published category=July 16, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/16


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/16

 category=July 16, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/16


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/16

 category=July 16, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/16


text:
Thread:Comments:US Senator Robert Byrd dies at age 92/On racisim

I believe that he died a racist, just hid it for most of his life. His two "Nay" votes against supreme court justices Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas are proof of this.


text:
Category:July 17, 2010

de:Kategorie:17.07.2010 es:Categoría:17 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:17 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:17 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月17日 pl:Kategoria:17 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:17 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:17. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:17. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 17, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月17日

title: Category:July 17, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/17

 category=Published category=July 17, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/17


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/17

 category=July 17, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/17


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/17

 category=July 17, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/17


text:
Category:July 18, 2010

de:Kategorie:18.07.2010 es:Categoría:18 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:18 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:18 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月18日 pl:Kategoria:18 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:18 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:18. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:18. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 18, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月18日

title: Category:July 18, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/18

 category=Published category=July 18, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/18


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/18

 category=July 18, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/18


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/18

 category=July 18, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/18


text:
Category:July 19, 2010

bg:Категория:Новини от 19 юли 2010 г. de:Kategorie:19.07.2010 es:Categoría:19 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:19 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:19 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月19日 pl:Kategoria:19 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:19 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:19 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:19. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:19. heinäkuuta 2010 sv:Kategori:19 juli 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 19, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月19日

title: Category:July 19, 2010


text: User talk:Keeganomics

title: User talk:Keeganomics


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/19

 category=Published category=July 19, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/19


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/19

 category=July 19, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/19


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/19

 category=July 19, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/19


text:
Category:July 20, 2010

bg:Категория:Новини от 20 юли 2010 г. de:Kategorie:20.07.2010 es:Categoría:20 de julio de 2010 eo:Kategorio:20-a de julio 2010 fr:Catégorie:20 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:20 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月20日 pl:Kategoria:20 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:20 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:20 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:20. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:20. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 20, 2010 tr:Kategori:2010/07/20 zh:Category:2010年7月20日

title: Category:July 20, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/20

 category=Published category=July 20, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/20


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/20

 category=July 20, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/20


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/20

 category=July 20, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/20


text:
Category:July 21, 2010

ca:Categoria:21 de juliol del 2010 de:Kategorie:21.07.2010 es:Categoría:21 de julio de 2010 eo:Kategorio:21-a de julio 2010 fr:Catégorie:21 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:21 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月21日 pl:Kategoria:21 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:21 de julho de 2010 sr:Категорија:21. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:21. heinäkuuta 2010 sv:Kategori:21 juli 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 21, 2010 tr:Kategori:2010/07/21 zh:Category:2010年7月21日

title: Category:July 21, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/21

 category=Published category=July 21, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/21


text:
Portal:Australia/2010/July/21

 category=July 21, 2010 category=Published category=Australia notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:Australia/2010/July/21


text:
Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/21

 category=July 21, 2010 category=Published category=New Zealand notcategory=Disputed suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Portal:New Zealand/2010/July/21


text:
Category:July 22, 2010

cs:Kategorie:22. červenec 2010 es:Categoría:22 de julio de 2010 fr:Catégorie:22 juillet 2010 it:Categoria:22 luglio 2010 ja:カテゴリ:2010年7月22日 pl:Kategoria:22 lipca 2010 pt:Categoria:22 de julho de 2010 ru:Категория:22 июля 2010 sr:Категорија:22. јул 2010. fi:Luokka:22. heinäkuuta 2010 ta:பகுப்பு:ஜூலை 22, 2010 zh:Category:2010年7月22日

title: Category:July 22, 2010


text:
Wikinews:2010/July/22

 category=Published category=July 22, 2010 notcategory=Disputed notcategory=No publish suppresserrors=true stablepages=only

title: Wikinews:2010/July/22