text:
User talk:Cvsramos

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:16, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cvsramos


text:
Template:Infobox/lookup/Mathematics

Available fields are documented at infobox table.

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

title: Template:Infobox/lookup/Mathematics


text:
User talk:119.160.66.121

Hi. An article on the Lahore killings has already been started: You are welcome to contribute to or continue it. There is no rule against starting from scratch if you prefer, though, but the formatting and sourcing has already been done for this one. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:119.160.66.121


text:
User talk:Remy96cloudwik

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:53, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Remy96cloudwik


text:
User talk:Cody MR

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:36, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Disputes imported from Wikipedia are not welcome at Wikinews. --Pi zero (talk) 15:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Listen here you Pi zero you unblock —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cody MR (talk • contribs) 15:07, 27 July 2017

 * Incivility is not going to get you unblocked. --Pi zero (talk) 15:13, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

 * you suppose your name is Pi zero is cause you don't have any more pi's HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cody MR (talk • contribs) 15:16, 27 July 2017

title: User talk:Cody MR


text:
User talk:Ziggid

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:44, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ziggid


text:
User talk:John.dd

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:48, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:John.dd


text:
User talk:هدى الصباحي

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:هدى الصباحي


text:
User talk:Keonte111

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:00, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Keonte111


text:
User talk:Giouyregondon

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:59, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Giouyregondon


text:
User talk:Ryantannenberg

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:09, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ryantannenberg


text:
User talk:Thegreatkemoyfoster

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:12, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thegreatkemoyfoster


text:
User talk:Sankalp palit

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:36, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sankalp palit


text:
User talk:Danomanion

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:37, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Danomanion


text:
User talk:IvanA

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:57, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:IvanA


text:
User talk:Inamul Rahim Shariff

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:15, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Inamul Rahim Shariff


text: Talk:Publisher withdraws book about Nelson Mandela's final days after family complaint


text: Comments:Publisher withdraws book about Nelson Mandela's final days after family complaint


text:
User talk:MalikNewell71

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:MalikNewell71


text:
User talk:Setemkia

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Setemkia


text:
User talk:ALIwaince

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:18, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:ALIwaince


text:
User talk:SheliaMarshburn

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 02:54, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:SheliaMarshburn


text:
User talk:Ruikle

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:06, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ruikle


text:
User talk:DF 13

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:DF 13


text:
User talk:FlyFishingGuy

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:FlyFishingGuy


text:
User talk:Gxrneyme

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gxrneyme


text:
User talk:Donls

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:14, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Donls


text:
User talk:Skeletonwarr

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 08:06, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Skeletonwarr


text:
User talk:Garfield7380

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:10, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Garfield7380


text:
User talk:Raedan2017

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:32, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Raedan2017


text:
User talk:X0stark69

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:45, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:X0stark69


text:
User talk:Jessicaong777

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:10, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jessicaong777


text:
User talk:TomasSirmans8

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 12:24, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

--Pi zero (talk) 20:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:TomasSirmans8


text:
User talk:Biáng

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 12:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Biáng


text:
User talk:Salma Khannous

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:26, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Salma Khannous


text:
User talk:Mahdi.B

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:32, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mahdi.B


text:
User talk:Tolikowens

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:46, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tolikowens


text:
User talk:In4ey

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 15:16, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:In4ey


text:
User talk:Stewofkc

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Stewofkc


text:
User talk:VICTOR HAO SILVA CHEN

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:22, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:VICTOR HAO SILVA CHEN


text:
User talk:Donnell msfts

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:22, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Donnell msfts


text:
User talk:Edman for

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:31, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Edman for


text:
User talk:Michaeltmccarthy

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:35, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Michaeltmccarthy


text:
User talk:ManuelHildreth

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:00, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:ManuelHildreth


text:
User talk:Hvtuananh

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hvtuananh


text:
User talk:R12ntech

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:R12ntech


text:
User talk:LucilleLehmann9

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:42, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:LucilleLehmann9


text:
User talk:Khendhida Sindimba

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:03, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Khendhida Sindimba


text:
User talk:Giovanni L. Zanchet

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:39, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Giovanni L. Zanchet


text:
User talk:Jdc Wiki

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:57, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jdc Wiki


text:
User talk:Jonameijers

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:33, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jonameijers


text:
User talk:Ksysctl

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:21, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ksysctl


text:
User talk:Belived555

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:26, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Belived555


text:
User talk:LinkTechDIY

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:15, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:LinkTechDIY


text:
User talk:Agusbou2015

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:31, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Agusbou2015


text:
User talk:I509VCB

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:43, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:I509VCB


text:
User talk:Navahc

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:20, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Navahc


text:
User talk:Raheel Raja

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Raheel Raja


text:
User talk:Kunver Abhimanyu Singh

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 12:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kunver Abhimanyu Singh


text:
User talk:Climaton Boy

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 12:04, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

--Pi zero (talk) 12:30, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Climaton Boy


text:
User talk:Ashutoshpaul1947

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:40, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ashutoshpaul1947


text:
User talk:Noveed

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Noveed


text:
User talk:أحمد أوبيهي

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:10, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:أحمد أوبيهي


text:
User talk:2 othman

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:23, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:2 othman


text:
User talk:Morth53

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:00, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Morth53


text:
User talk:Bookish 3141

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:47, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bookish 3141


text:
User talk:Wanghowe2017

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:02, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Wanghowe2017


text:
User talk:Duke.urdoe

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Duke.urdoe


text:
User talk:Extraunix

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:57, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Extraunix


text:
User talk:Devadbpa

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:16, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Devadbpa


text:
User talk:Shyam kumae

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:34, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shyam kumae


text:
User talk:Up2DaHilt

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:23, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Up2DaHilt


text:
User talk:Pagiats

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:45, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pagiats


text:
User talk:Madezyma News13

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:47, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

--Pi zero (talk) 20:54, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Madezyma News13


text:
User talk:Prathapanb

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Prathapanb


text:
User talk:VPIGonzalo

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:VPIGonzalo


text:
British dancer and talent show winner Robert Anker dies in car accident aged 27

July 30, 2017

Robert Anker, a British dancer and member of troupe when they won the 2009 season of, died in a car accident in Canada on Thursday. Anker died after a collision between his and a  pick-up truck. The accident occurred in, at around 6:00 AM Thursday morning,. Anker, who moved to Canada last year, was 27 years old.

confirmed the accident had occurred and the driver of the pick-up truck was not injured. A spokesman for the British Foreign Office said "We are aware of the death of a British man in Canada. We are providing assistance to his family at this sad time".

Anker's cousin Rochelle Hanson set up a page, by yesterday already past its target of £5,000, to raise funds for his family to travel to the funeral in Canada. Hanson said "The family are devastated. He was an amazing and talented dancer. We would love to ensure that his family don’t worry or stress about money at this time."

Diversity, Anker's former dance crew, tweeted "A former member of our group has tragically passed away. He inspired so many with his talent and was taken far too soon. R.I.P Rob." The Twitter account for Britain's Got Talent said "We are so sorry to hear of the loss of Robert Anker, our thoughts and condolences go out to his friends, family and the whole of Diversity."

Dean Lee, a choreographer on talent show, tweeted, "Rob Anker. I have no words to speak after hearing of your passing. This is truly heart breaking. Thanks for the memories. Shine bright."

After winning the 2009 series of Britain's Got Talent, Anker performed in music videos of singers and, and in the production of  in the. Anker and his girlfriend Cyndi married in September.


text:
User talk:SirHyde

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:13, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:SirHyde


text:
User talk:عماد النمر

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:18, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:عماد النمر


text:
User talk:FIGHTER KD

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:40, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:FIGHTER KD


text:
User talk:Palco7

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Palco7


text:
User talk:Elcester18

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:56, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Elcester18


text:
User talk:Raghvendra99674010

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:11, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Raghvendra99674010


text:
User talk:Bugfolder

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bugfolder


text:
User talk:Irekw34

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:19, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Irekw34


text:
User talk:The cheetah

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:23, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:The cheetah


text:
User talk:Adorján W.

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:26, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Adorján W.


text:
User talk:Amiron990

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:27, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Amiron990


text:
User talk:Quitsmokingweed

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:46, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Quitsmokingweed


text:
User talk:Jackdauser

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:02, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jackdauser


text:
User talk:Asd1346

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:42, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Asd1346


text:
User talk:Yarabbi

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:42, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yarabbi


text:
User talk:Mottalibctg

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:49, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mottalibctg


text:
User talk:Mummy363

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 12:46, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mummy363


text:
User talk:Anthonyleonhardt

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Anthonyleonhardt


text:
User talk:Comedorinha

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 15:00, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Comedorinha


text:
User talk:Cage37

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:29, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cage37


text:
User talk:Марат Мастер

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:43, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Марат Мастер


text:
User talk:Nexus501

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:54, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nexus501


text:
User talk:Ignat Zaripov

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ignat Zaripov


text:
User talk:Happy New Year 2018

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:52, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Happy New Year 2018


text:
User talk:Neak1982

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:15, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Neak1982


text:
User talk:Tamorning

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tamorning


text:
User talk:Prof. Uyouko

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:50, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Prof. Uyouko


text:
User talk:Flendo

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:58, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Flendo


text:
User talk:Manuel Edman

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:32, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Local uploads
You locally uploaded some media files that do not appear to be consistent with local policy. Pending explanation, I've blocked your account. You may explain on this page. --Pi zero (talk) 14:07, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Manuel Edman


text:
User talk:PearlBechtel

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:PearlBechtel


text:
Talk:British dancer and talent show winner Robert Anker dies in car accident aged 27

Where, why, how
The story tells a lot, but not how or why the accident occurred. From, photo, it looks like a heads-on collision? Location is described as "Major Mackenzie Drive east of Hwy. 27 shortly after 6 a.m." --Gryllida (talk) 00:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * True, it would have been a stronger article with more of those answers. --Pi zero (talk) 01:39, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


text: Comments:British dancer and talent show winner Robert Anker dies in car accident aged 27


text:
User talk:HumbertoKulakows

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:38, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:HumbertoKulakows


text:
User talk:Bullsurd

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:49, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bullsurd


text:
User talk:Turner PHOTOGRAPHY INDUSTRIES

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:07, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Turner PHOTOGRAPHY INDUSTRIES


text:
User talk:和自己賽跑的人

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:33, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:和自己賽跑的人


text:
User talk:Sapphire Williams

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:41, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sapphire Williams


text:
User talk:Dnovita

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dnovita


text:
User talk:Jamesarrington

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:17, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jamesarrington


text:
User talk:Videogameplayer99

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Videogameplayer99


text:
User talk:Nkaimbi

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nkaimbi


text:
User talk:Bulba Corporation

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:09, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

--Pi zero (talk) 11:27, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bulba Corporation


text:
User talk:Fredy Baptista

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:31, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Fredy Baptista


text:
User talk:Gourav1999

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 06:35, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gourav1999


text:
User:Asadwarraich

I am a final year civil engineering student at.

title: User:Asadwarraich


text:
User talk:Needle BFDI

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:00, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Needle BFDI


text:
User talk:Hamuuuuu

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hamuuuuu


text:
User talk:IngridMott56

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:IngridMott56


text:
User talk:Same$

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Same$


text:
User talk:اسماعيل اشراع

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:اسماعيل اشراع


text:
User talk:Eteil

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:56, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Eteil


text:
User talk:Ainsley Mallari

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 12:05, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ainsley Mallari


text:
User talk:Lumore

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:59, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lumore


text:
User talk:RG067

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:RG067


text:
User talk:Yu Chi Huang

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:35, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yu Chi Huang


text:
User talk:Mr.Ilia T

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 15:26, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mr.Ilia T


text:
User talk:Fxhunt

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Fxhunt


text:
User talk:Kutlo15

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:23, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kutlo15


text:
User talk:DrStrauss

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:52, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:DrStrauss


text:
User talk:CSteigenberger (WMF)

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:53, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:CSteigenberger (WMF)


text:
User talk:Naighthawk19

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:53, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Naighthawk19


text:
User talk:Bobbyjohn10

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:52, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bobbyjohn10


text:
User talk:Sdfayd

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:35, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sdfayd


text:
User talk:SYDEURX

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:SYDEURX


text:
User talk:Zumafapive45

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Zumafapive45


text:
User talk:Shailendra2025

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:04, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shailendra2025


text:
User talk:FelicitasSchippe

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:FelicitasSchippe


text:
User talk:LeoBou

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:LeoBou


text:
User talk:Jesenia0667

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jesenia0667


text:
User talk:Midnight whisper

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Midnight whisper


text:
Anthony Scaramucci leaves role as US White House communications director after ten days

August 1, 2017

United States president Donald Trump dismissed from his role as  yesterday. Scaramucci had only held the position for ten days but had already received criticism after a profanity-laced phone call to a reporter from . President Trump forced Scaramucci's resignation after his new, General , made the decision, The New York Times reported. General Kelly replaced who resigned on Friday.

, White House Press Secretary, released a statement after Scaramucci's dismissal. She said, "Anthony Scaramucci will be leaving his role as White House Communications Director. Mr. Scaramucci felt it was best to give chief of staff John Kelly a clean slate and the ability to build his own team. We wish him all the best."

Scaramucci was criticised after an on-the-record phone call with New Yorker reporter. Scaramucci contacted Lizza after it was reported he was at dinner with Fox News host and, a former executive also for Fox News. In the phone call, he demanded Lizza reveal who leaked the details of the dinner and suspected Reince Priebus was responsible. He said, "Reince is a fucking paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac". He went on to mimic Priebus by saying, "Let me leak the fucking thing and see if I can cock block these people the way I cock blocked Scaramucci for six months." In the same phone call he also criticised White House strategist. He was quoted as saying, "I'm not Steve Bannon, I'm not trying to suck my own cock".

Huckabee Sanders commented on the phone call in her statement saying, "The President certainly felt that Anthony's comments were inappropriate for someone in that position and he didn't want to burden Gen. Kelly also with that line of succession".

It has been confirmed Scaramucci was not reassigned within the administration. In his resignation Scaramucci reportedly requested to be redeployed to the US's as chief strategy officer. He was previously vice president and chief strategy officer at the Export-Import Bank.

Scaramucci was the third communications director of Trump's presidency. resigned from the position in May while former Press Secretary assumed some of the role.

Before joining the White House, Scaramucci was a financier and founded, an investment firm. Though not always a supporter of President Trump, he later advised him during last year's US presidential campaign. In 2012, he was the national finance co-chair for the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney. Before aligning himself with Trump, he fundraised for the GOP primary campaigns of both and Jeb Bush.


text:
User talk:Jfews

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:04, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jfews


text:
User talk:A mandatory

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:12, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:A mandatory


text:
User talk:Job bento

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:53, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Job bento


text:
Thread:Comments:Polish President Andrzej Duda vetoes law placing Supreme Court under power of ruling party/Being "subject to the law"

"Deputy Justice Minister Marcin Warchol said the laws would prevent justice from "becom[ing] a form of privilege" and ensure all Poles are subject to the law." is an interesting allegation. One'd think that requiring a particular class to abide by the laws doesn't require more power than exactly that.


text:
User talk:Boss raflex

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:06, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Boss raflex


text:
User talk:Sakura Torch

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sakura Torch


text:
User talk:SheliaMarshall

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:21, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:SheliaMarshall


text:
User talk:Forksandspoons

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:28, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Forksandspoons


text:
User talk:Kelleymack

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:55, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kelleymack


text:
User talk:Mjeffreys2

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mjeffreys2


text:
User talk:StellaR675

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:StellaR675


text:
User talk:Alex94montagu

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alex94montagu


text:
User talk:Marquemarque

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Marquemarque


text:
User talk:Aye Minn Htet

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:16, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aye Minn Htet


text:
User talk:Markv.galdones

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:36, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Markv.galdones


text:
User talk:ANTÓNIO B. ALBERTO

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:34, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:ANTÓNIO B. ALBERTO


text:
User talk:Tahun 2017

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tahun 2017


text:
User talk:春上衿衣

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 08:38, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:春上衿衣


text:
User talk:Marli Immanuel Tignero Pacoli

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 08:40, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Marli Immanuel Tignero Pacoli


text:
User talk:Randie05

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Randie05


text:
User talk:IPraveenVdthk

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:06, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:IPraveenVdthk


text:
User talk:Gonesoft

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gonesoft


text:
User talk:Shroudedcode

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:43, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shroudedcode


text:
User talk:AundreaDunaway5

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:AundreaDunaway5


text:
User talk:Jagath krishnakumar

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:16, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jagath krishnakumar


text:
User talk:Judivaldo Tchizeu

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:43, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Judivaldo Tchizeu


text:
User talk:Decole decole

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:44, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Decole decole


text:
User talk:Edgarpossas

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 11:50, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Edgarpossas


text:
User talk:Houssame0000

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:38, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Houssame0000


text:
User talk:SNSTEAMS

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:53, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:SNSTEAMS


text:
User talk:RanjitBrahmachary

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:RanjitBrahmachary


text:
Wikinews:Water cooler/policy/archives/2017/July

Everyone's Favorite News Site
At the risk of redundancy, I wish to post here another discussion of the concept that drove my proposal for a “Birds of a Feather” session for Wikimania 2017, August 9-13, in Montreal to discuss “Submissions/Building Wikinews into the premier news site worldwide”. I hope this is more complete and compelling than what I posted earlier. DavidMCEddy (talk) 20:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Vision
There is an available market niche for a web site that could provide the best selection of news for everyone except the rabid ideologues. If done right, this could attract an audience as large as Google and Wikipedia.

Noncommercial
Everyone's Favorite News site could provide noncommercial news with citizen-directed funding. We need noncommercial news, because progress on many and perhaps all substantive issues facing humanity today is blocked, because every plausible countermeasure threatens someone with substantive control over the mainstream media.

Landing page
The proposed landing page for Everyone's Favorite news site would offer alternatives from hyper-local to international. Within each, users would be offered the range of available news sources. Part of this could be similar to “allsides.com”, which posts contrasting perspectives on the same issue side by side.

User interests
The defaults for user interests at Everyone's Favorite news site would be determined by geolocation and browsing history. Geolocation would be translated into a list of all the relevant political jurisdictions. Users could optionally adjust that by answering questions indicating level of interest in different topics.

Wikimedia rules
A key feature would be to promote a neutral point of view (NPOV), assuming good faith in others, and citing credible sources to the maximum extent feasible. This would involve a mix of existing news sources including minutes of meetings and official publications of organizations of all types and sizes from social and religious organizations to small businesses, nonprofits, local governmental bodies and international businesses, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and the United Nations. It would also link to blogs showing contrasting perspectives, while avoiding potentially inflammatory material without reference to intelligent questions.

Consider, for example, the claims of Hutu leaders in 1994 that the Tutsis were cockroaches coming to kill all Hutus, and the Hutus therefore had to preemptively kill all Tutsis first. The claims were mostly but not entirely unfounded: Tutsi guerrillas were destroying property and killing a few Hutus. The threat was, however, massively overstated, apparently to increase the power of exiting elites, including certain international business and geopolitical interests. The result was a major humanitarian catastrophe.

We need something that will effectively counter the divide-and-conquer rhetoric of existing for-profit media, including companies like Cambridge Analytica. Appropriate responses to this threat might include creating Wikiblogs and Wikisocial, discussed below.

 * Wikipedian policies are totally unsuitable for a news project. In particular, AGF absolutely does not belong on a news site.
 * what's AGF? DavidMCEddy (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Rofl at myself. That could make my remarks a bit harder to understand, couldn't it.  Asume Good Faith.  --Pi zero (talk) 15:27, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It is impossible to cover news on a project with AGF.
 * Doesn't that depend on how you interpret AGF? To me, AGF just means maintaining civil discourse.  It does NOT absolve us from the need to Trust, but verify -- and the rules for documentation are different for Wikinews than Wikipedia, as you have noted.  DavidMCEddy (talk) 16:42, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I think civil discourse is very important.
 * At the risk of saying something that some might consider inflammatory, I will recall that I've heard both Jews and Palestinians say of the other, "You don't understand those people: They're crazy.  I think they're both right, but that does not make them any different from the rest of humanity.  The human psychology behind this was eloquently described in Thinking, Fast and Slow;  Danile Kahneman won the 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in economics for the path-breaking researched summarized in that book.
 * I believe the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has so far proved to be intractable in part because too few on either side assume good faith on the part of the other and therefore don't have the patience to listen to the perspectives of the other. If we could get Jews and Palestinians collaborating on articles newsworthy events for en.wikinews, each assuming good faith on the part of the other, both sides might more easily see how their preconceptions color their current perceptions.  This in turn could begin to build bridges toward a better future for all.  (By the way, I'm a goy, married to a Jew.  This crisis has run through our family for decades.)  DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:27, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * There is, to understate, a lot to say about this. Hopefully I'll have a chance to expound on it sometime soon (not immediately, though, since there are things waiting on the review queue).  There's the matter of why/how AGF goes wrong on Wikipedia, and there's the separate matter of why the approach used on Wikinews would not work on Wikipedia.  --Pi zero (talk) 18:53, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

 * When I first came to Wikipedia I thought AGF was incredibly naively idealistic, and that was attractive to me — idealism is essential to a successful wiki, it's the thing that drives volunteers to passionate contribution. I couldn't imagine how Wikipedia could function; and I approached the project with humility, assuming there was something about its dynamics I didn't understand, and I should start with a blank slate, assuming nothing I'd learned elsewhere would necessarily apply, and I should patiently wait to pick up by osmosis a sense of how the place worked.  By the time I came to Wikinews several years later, I was so indoctrinated in Wikipedian culture that I was shocked to discover Wikinews not only hadn't adopted AGF, but aggressively denied it; I couldn't imagine how a wiki could succeed without it.  I adopted the same sort of humility as I had with Wikipedia (and with Wikibooks, in between), assuming nothing I'd learned elsewhere — including, nothing I'd learned at Wikpedia or Wikibooks — would necessarily apply, and I should patiently wait to pick up by osmosis a sense of how the place worked.  A bit over a year after I arrived here, Wikinews was shaken to its foundations by a horrific social melt-down; there was very much the cyberspace equivalent of a furious torch-carrying lynch mob.  It took me years to sort out in my mind what had been the underlying causes.  One was that the community had been waiting to tear itself apart over the issue of AGF:  the hard-news people saw AGF as totally unreconcilable with journalism — and frankly I always agreed with this in general, and my adherence to this position only became more refined as I came to understand the absolutely essential role that accumulated reputation plays in the ability of Wikinews to operate — and a crowd who had never escaped from the Wikipedian mindset, who tolerated the hard-news folks on the surface but, underneath, had (I would now assess) a deep burning resentment (sometimes edging into hatred) for anyone they perceived as questioning Wikipedian policies.  I found myself in the middle of an awful mess that I didn't fully understand at the time; I understood the Wikipedian passion for its way of doing things, yet it seemed obvious to me that circumstances are different on Wikinews.  I brought about a cease-fire compromise, at the time, between the hard-news and AGF factions.  But the other deep underlying cause of the disaster was, in retrospect, that absence of AGF is not enough:  we needed an explicit rule to provide positive guidance.  After the big social meltdown, things went on for a while, but then a prominent member of the AGF crowd quit the project (mind you, this person was rather young at the time, which changes how one thinks of them now), and over the next half year or so a bunch of the other AGFers followed.  This, unexpectedly, made it possible to make more progress on Wikinews infrastructure than we had been able to before, because before we were (in retrospect) spending a lot of effort just on a holding action to keep the AGFers from subverting what the project had accomplished.  It has always been difficult to make progress anyway on Wikinews infrastructure because we spend so much effort on the day-to-day news production that we don't have much left for infrastructure; and coping with the Wikipedian crowd was taking up our remaining energy.  Once that faction had abated, I drafted something that articulated explicitly the principles that, I came to understand (remember, I'd spent years by this time studying to grok the project's dynamics), had always underlain the hard-news faction; frankly, I think if Never assume had been in place beforehand it would have prevented the specific disaster aforementioned (though the hard-news/AGF factions were probably always going to come to blows sooner or later). Later, the same user who had led that first exodus from the project was also centrally involved in starting a "fork" of Wikinews.  The fork failed.  I actually wished them well; they had the opportunity to pursue their ideas about how to do wiki-based news, and we had the opportunity to pursue ours.  Not to put too fine a point on it, theirs failed, and we're still here.  Imho this was inevitable, because what they stood for was basically a negative — not insisting on checking against the sources before publication.  We had the passionate ideals (remember I said a volunteer project needs those?).  Oddly, since their stated philosophy rejected our philosophy and favored an inclusive publication policy, from what I hear they copied much of our technical infrastructure but not our article archives.  Late in the game, seeing that we were continuing (at a reduced level), and perhaps observing my extensive activity here, one of the folks at the fork invited me to come contribute to the fork; I don't actually remember how I declined, though I certainly hope I was as gracious about it as they were.  I do think they had it backwards, though; it wasn't that people contributing passionately caused the Wikinews philosophy to succeed, but that the Wikinews philosophy caused people to contribute passionately.  It was vastly easier to get things published on the fork project, but why would people want to do so? One thing both factions — ultimately, the Wikinewsies and the forkers — agreed on was the we need to make review eaiser.  The fork tried to solve the problem by not doing the work (I know that sounds like an exaggeration, but I think it's one of those things that really isn't an exaggeration even though it sounds like one); that fails, massively, because it misses the point of doing journalism at all (and, ultimately, misses the definition of what journalism is — I really, really want to write up my views on Wikinews for you, and I even started a first draft of it a while ago, but I'm still not there yet — see my earlier comments on day-to-day news production versus infrastructure).  My alternative is to make a very simple, technically "small" enhancement to wiki markup that's a total game-changer because it makes it possible for wiki communities to grow, by crowdsourcing, semi-automated tools that make tasks easier without diminishing their human element.  And apply that technique to build semi-automated assistance for both reviewing and writing Wikinews articles.  There are lots of nuances on this.  For example, I used to think we would want to address the difficulty of writing (with an article wizard) first, but I've since realized we need the review tools first — because frankly, despite the difficulties, we have more demand for review than we have supply, already.  Don't make the mistake, btw, of thinking that some articles don't get reviewed before they go stale because we need more review labor; that's not the case.  I remember times when we had more review labor available and still lost some articles that way.  There is a lot of demand for what we do here at Wikinews (contrasting with the fork), and, given a reasonable level of consistently available review labor, submissions will afaics always increase until they exceed it.  Another nuance is that, to be blunt, the Wikimedia Foundation must not be allowed to have any creative control over this.  They have always been rather aggressively unfriendly to news (not that they necessarily understand that that's what they're doing), and I suspect their deeply mistaken priorities actually make them aggressively unfriendly to wikis in general (which they almost certainly don't understand they're doing).  There's a bit about my thoughts on that, in broad terms, at User:Pi zero/essays/vision/sisters. Btw, back when the big controversies were raging here, and for some time thereafter, I used to try to take a "relativistic" attitude toward AGF, maintaining that it's right for Wikipedia at the same time that it's deeply wrong for Wikinews.  I struggled and struggled to explain that, and eventually came to the conclusion it's not true; that AGF has been a slow poison to Wikipedia, and its long-term effects there are one of the reasons the Wikipedian social atmosphere has become so toxic.  --Pi zero (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

 * I'm confused: When "the Wikipedian social atmosphere" is toxic, doesn't that mean that people are NOT assuming good faith on the part of others, and are failing to push the need to write from a neutral point of view citing credible sources?  DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Low acceptance rate on Wikinews
Wikinews strives with reasonable success to offer well-written, credible news that has attracted an audience.

It has a problem, however, with the low number of articles accepted; Between May 29 and June 9, 2017, they published 11 articles -- roughly one per day.

The English-language Wikinews has published only 0.8 percent of the articles submitted; internationally, only 6.4 percent of submissions have been published (as of 2017-04-28). One suspects that most of the unpublished submissions represent potential contributors, who will on average write less for Wikinews in the future.

I believe that Wikinews could get more submissions without sacrificing quality if the current articles were listed as “Featured” or “Front page”, and articles that are currently rejected are instead redirected somewhere with lower standards -- but not rejected.

The reason for rejection would determine how an article might be redirected. If it's not sufficiently timely or not well written or not likely to attract a sufficiently broad audience, I think it could and should be accepted for “Back pages”. As long as the article is otherwise NPOV citing credible sources, second-tier acceptance would acknowledge the contributor's efforts while encouraging a better effort on future submissions by explaining why this was not “Front page” news. No journalist expects every article to appear on the front page. And there is a huge difference in career motivation between writing for back pages and writing for a trash can.

In addition, some of the articles on these “Back pages” might help future researchers and criminal investigators searching for hints of problems that later become important. This might be compared to astronomy, where amateurs are making important discoveries by monitoring variable stars, tracking asteroids and discovering transient objects, such as comets and novae.

Another reason for publishing “uninteresting” stories could be to help deter questionable activities.

Consider, for example, the “City of Bell scandal”:   Bell, CA, is a city of roughly 35,000. Just over a decade after the local newspaper died, they made the front page of the Los Angeles Times: The city was near bankruptcy in spite of astronomical property tax rates. The city manager was by far the highest paid public servant in US history, as far as anyone could tell: His annual compensation package was over a million dollars a year, over double that of the President of the United States. The assistant city manager and most of the city council also had compensation packages substantially above those of comparable positions elsewhere.

If citizen journalists had been writing reports of the boring city council meetings in the early 2000s, the city manager might not have been so bold as to push for such outlandish compensation. The serious problems that arose would likely have been caught earlier. Without those problems, many of the reports might have remained boring but still necessary. (Some of those reports might have included items of interest to locals but not a wider audience.)

Other “uninteresting” reports might later provide a baseline to help concerned citizens or prosecutors identify the origins of some subsequent official malfeasance.

And even without that, citizen journalists attending and writing about uninteresting meetings learn what to look for and write about in the future. Then when something interesting happens, they may be better equipped to see it and describe it in terms that are clear, concise, and compelling -- and to do so more quickly, because of the greater experience in writing.

 * Wikinews policy does not preclude local stories. See WN:Newsworthiness.  My earlier remark (above) has something to say about cause and cure for our publication rate.  --Pi zero (talk) 14:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikiblogs
Articles that qualify as editorials could be referred to a new Wikimedia project that might be called “Wikiblogs”. Articles there would still have to meet the standard of writing from a neutral point of view citing credible sources. This might be accomplished with an effort to pair contributors with very different perspectives on the same or similar issues: If each can assume good faith in the other, they could together produce something far better than either could alone. Both the collaboration and the resulting article could build bridges for the resolution of conflicts that might otherwise be virtually intractable.

 * Blogs have no value journalistically. See my remarks above on incompatibility of AGF with journalism.  --Pi zero (talk) 14:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

 * So? Blogs don't have to be journalism:  Wikiblogs could serve multiple purposes, e.g.,:
 * A rejection in Wikinews currently discourages future contributions by that individual. If an article is referred to Wikiblogs and can meet reasonable standards for that, the contributor might be more likely to write something else in the future that might meet Wikinews standards.
 * Contributors to Wikiblogs should still be required to acknowledge contrary evidence and avoid inflammatory language. What they learn while meeting Wikiblogs standards may encourage them to write something later that fits the Wikinews criteria.
 * Wikiblogs could encourage people to ventilate about issues that concern them in an environment that pushes them to read and cite material produced by their opposition while suppressing inflammatory rhetoric and looking for other evidence.
 * For all these reasons, we help people see other sides to their concerns. That in turn could help build a foundation for conflict resolution in addition to training future Wikinesians.
 * By the way, I'm 2 for 4 with Wikinews. My first failure got stale, because I misread reviewer(s) comments.  When I finally went back to check, the piece was no longer timely.  If it could have still been considered for a "back page" or Wikiblogs, I might have been more encouraged to try to write more for Wikinews.  My last failure was late before I started.  I wrote it, because I felt it was important, and I had finally cleared enough "urgent" items from my list of priorities to find time for that.  If that could have been accepted someplace, it might have made some of my other work in that area easier.  DavidMCEddy (talk) 19:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * An actual blog has no standards, to speak of, and has no educational merit and doesn't belong on the wikimedia sisterhood. People can blog elsewhere; wikimedia is not a web host.  If you're talking about something with standards, but less than Wikinews's, then you're actually talking about lowering Wikinews standards.  Which does not work, and in that case issues of journalism certainly are relevant.  --Pi zero (talk) 20:01, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikisocial
Social media have become too important to be ignored. People should be able to share with friends whatever they want in an environment that does not make them a target for exploitation, as long as it's not inflammatory.

The world needs and can easily afford a social media platform that flags and appropriately challenges hate speech. The Wikimedia Foundation could offer a new “Wikisocial” project to respond to this need.

Other social media cultivate and amplify racist, sexist, and homophobic perspectives within internally homogeneous groups that too seldom get challenged. These groups are identified and exploited by companies like Cambridge Analytica, who manage to convince millions of people to do things contrary to their best interests.

 * Every media organization in the world
 * sells changes in the behaviors of its audience to its funders.

Google and Facebook are no exception: They make money through advertising and are subject to the commercial imperatives of other media organizations:  It's not smart to bite the hands that feed you. It's not good business to let too much information pass that might offend major advertisers.

Of course, if Google and Facebook were too blatant about their commercial nature, they'd lose audience. Still, they have a conflict of interest in blocking ads, infomercials, and other material submitted by organizations like Cambridge Analytica.

We can do better with citizen-directed funding for media, which is essentially how the Wikimedia Foundation works.

Comments? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 20:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikisearch to respond to the commercial pressure on Google
A lion will not become a vegetarian. Google's business model, like any other commercial media organization, is selling changes in the behaviors of its users to its funders. Google was recently fined €2.42bn for anti-competitive practices.

Small businesses compete on price and quality. Their advertising is more benign than advertising by much larger organizations, because larger organizations compete primarily on control of the media and the political process and only secondarily on price and quality. For more, see Winning the War on Terror.

Fortunately, it should be relatively easy and cheap to produce a comparable service with citizen-directed funding. Enough is known today about the techniques Google uses to produce a version that is simultaneously simpler and cheaper to code and operate. This could be done using free, open-source software (FOSS) that would help educate the public while making it even easier to generate healthy competition among search services.

I know absolutely none of the details of Google's operation. However, it's clear that part of their code is required to allow them to make money selling advertising. A "Wikisearch" would not need that part of Google's code.

A "Wikisearch" might want to invest more than Google in filtering for sexism, racism, and xenophobia of almost any variety. Questionable content should be flagged as such but not suppressed and should to the maximum extent feasible be presented with contrary material. This could help reduce the Balkanization of international society, discussed in the next section. DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Beyond this, the future of humanity may depend on growing an honest search capability coded in free, open-source software (FOSS) that provides an effective alternative to Google: Otherwise, Google's financial imperatives will eventually overwhelm their unofficial slogan,"Don't be evil."  A lion will not become a vegetarian. DavidMCEddy (talk) 09:47, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikianalytica countering the Balkanization of the body politic
Organizations like Cambridge Analytica have reportedly used microtargeting to amplify and exploit the Balkanization of the electorate. The chief executive of Cambridge Analytica bragged about having "somewhere close to four or five thousand data points on every individual [in the US]. ... So we model the personality of every adult across the United States, some 230 million people . Other sources suggested this helped win the Brexit vote:  It would be naive to assume that this is limited to the US nor to Cambridge Analytica.

On June 19, 2017, multiple news outlets reported that Upguard, Inc. found that data on 198 million Americans had been publicly available on an unsecured server for some portion of the time between June 1 and 19, 2017. If criminals specializing in obtained that data, it could create serious problems for up to 198 million Americans. The most important part of this story for this discussion is that it documents that the Republican Party had contracted with firms like Deep Root Analytics, TargetPoint Consulting, and Data Trust to compile these data for use in the 2016 elections. (See, e.g., ").

The good news from this is that if microtargeting can be used to divide and conquer an electorate]], other organizations could use the same or similar tools to facilitate honest communications and nonviolent conflict resolution in ways that also reduce political corruption and increase the prospects for peace, democracy, and broadly shared economic growth. DavidMCEddy (talk) 21:53, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Missing submission number
Seems that the submission lacks a number, needed for chance of acceptance. Without it, the submission can't be accepted. There is another submission, which has a number, but... it's a poster presentation. Nevertheless, it's receiving good acceptance ratings. Don't expect lectures about Wikinews anytime soon there. --George Ho (talk) 06:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Thanks for this. Yesterday I received an email from a member of the review committee suggesting they are still looking at it.  I got the impression that there's still a good chance it will make it onto the schedule.  I see my submission is not currently on your "Submission Review" list.  However, I don't think it's too late for you to add your name to the "Interested attendees" section of "Submissions/Building Wikinews into the premier news site worldwide".  DavidMCEddy (talk) 12:29, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The link doesn't work. May I change  to  ? As for the question, I can't afford a trip, but thanks anyway. --George Ho (talk) 20:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Thanks for explaining that the link was broken and how to fix it. DavidMCEddy (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom elections
flag I propose the same dates, rules, procedures as in 2016. (See WN:Water cooler/policy/archives/2016/July, Arbitration Committee/2016 election.)
 * The community must agree on all election procedures by July 1, and election committee members by July 10.
 * The deadline for nominations is 2000 UTC July 17.
 * Voting will take place from 2000 UTC July 18 to 2000 UTC July 30. Questions and comments may be made during that time period.
 * Since the incumbent members' seats expire on August 3, the election committee will declare the winners on about July 31, and the new term begins after declaration. Should any case be before the ArbCom at election time, the current committee continues to sit after turnover on cases that started under the current committee. Any new case after turnover is for the new committee.

As worked well for the past several years, I strongly recommend the committee not create a page for "questions for all candidates"; questions for each candidate should be located under that candidate. This is the way things have been done in all but two previous elections; once there was no place for questions at all (the undesirability of this is obvious, I hope), and once, five years ago, we had a page for questions for all candidates, and it turned into a political circus and an ordeal for the nominees (en.wn ArbCom is a judicial body, so should be scrupulously apolitical). I'm not the only one who experienced the circus five years ago and came away from it with a powerful conviction it should not be allowed to happen again.

We need at least two people for the election committee. Volunteers? --Pi zero (talk) 03:19, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Count me out. I don't have enough experience to be an arbitrator. One question: What would happen to ArbCom service when no one volunteers? Would it be suspended? --George Ho (talk) 04:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * BTW, the years are incorrect. It's "2017", not "2000". --George Ho (talk) 04:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC) Oops, my bad. --George Ho (talk) 05:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 2000 means 8 PM (UTC).acagastya 05:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Gryllida, pi zero, if I can nominate candidates for the election committee, let's keep it like last year. Okay with that? acagastya 10:59, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I take it the election rules are okay by you? If last year's election committee members are willing to serve; that would be Gryllida and Bddpaux. --Pi zero (talk) 11:45, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Pi zero, you were in the election committe last time? The election comittee members can't participate in the ArbCom, can they? (Forgot to mention Bddpaux. ) let me have a look, I don't remember the rules. acagastya 12:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I would like to discuss about this, probably on IRC. acagastya 12:37, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I have never been on the election committee. I'm on ArbCom, and I often help out with routine tasks during the election (which greatly reduces incidental burdens on the election committee; their central responsibility is certifying the election, and, very rarely, making rulings on unusual situations). --Pi zero (talk) 12:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm concerned about the ArbCom process. Last year's election rules are too rigid. The ArbCom hasn't taken one case for a whole year and doesn't have its own Enforcement and Clarification/Amendment system. Also, some of its members have been inactive for almost one year. Is ArbCom worth preserving? --George Ho (talk) 22:30, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * ArbCom is essential. It keeps us independent.  It performs functions behind the scenes, from time to time.  And it exists to be called upon when needed.  Letting it lapse would be disastrous.  Btw, Wikinews ArbCom is a judicial body; there's no need for me to critique en.wp ArbCom here, but by comparison ours is far less interventionist.  And the members don't have to be actively editing to be valuable (I recall the times I've served jury duty, they emphasize the valuable function that jurors play by being available, even if they don't get impaneled).  --Pi zero (talk) 23:00, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Pinging KTo288 and Bawolff for invitation. --George Ho (talk) 00:32, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Is there a page where I could read up on Wikinews ArbCom's duties and responsibilities, maybe cases and policies that they've handled in the past? I think that would provide me with some needed perspective.  If you know an especially instructive one, I'd like your recs too. Darkfrog24 (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * ArbCom was most actively used early in its existence. Only a few cases have actually been heard.  I'm not sure how much of a sense of those cases one can get from the archives (at WN:Requests for arbitration); I saw one of those happen, and it seems to me that the context of the thing doesn't easily come through from the archive, but I can't readily put myself in the position of someone who didn't have the first-hand experience.  A particularly disastrous variation in the election process, which I feel I can criticize as I survived it, took place in 2010, when the election pages were set up in a way that encouraged asking questions broadside of all candidates; it created a huge politicization of the process that had (I gather) never happened before on Wikinews and certainly hasn't happened since; it was really quite nastily exhausting.  One of the questions was about the ArbCom case that had happened earlier that year; my own take on that ArbCom case is there (I recall that I thought I saw a solution at the time, but I don't recall what it was, and the whole matter ceased to be remotely of interest to the community shortly thereafter).  Once I actually became an Arb, I found that from time to time, quite irregularly, someone from outside the project — either someone with the Foundation, or someone from another sister project — needs to contact someone highly trusted, and with some authority, on en.wn, and they contact an Arb.  General principles are described (not succinctly) at WN:Arbitration Committee; there are some significant bits there if one looks carefully for them, e.g. I'd say WN:ARBCOM is a particularly high-information-density section.  --Pi zero (talk) 13:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I am also concerned about the "need" for an ArbCom on this wiki. There were only 3 voters in last year's elections - even fewer than the number of members. And most of the current ArbCom was inactive then, and only one current member has made more than 3 edits in 2017 on en.wikinews. It sounds like this is more trouble than it's worth, and is bureaucracy to sustain bureaucracy. --Rschen7754 18:29, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Rschen7754. Glad I'm not the only one. Election committee, you're not gonna nominate less than active users, are you? --George Ho (talk) 00:08, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * ArbCom is not bureaucracy on Wikinews. ArbCom is (amongst other things, notably including being our judiciary body of last resort) an essential safeguard against the project being destroyed by outside bureaucracies that are dangerously clueless about news.  --Pi zero (talk) 01:12, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Um... I want to say something about non-Wikipedia projects, like Wikibooks. However, I can't... not yet. About "news"... what's your definition of "news"? Major competitive newspapers have broader coverage of everything, like local news, national news, world news, op-eds, TV listings, celebrity news, etc. To me, "news" is... something new and current or ongoing. Anything special or something... Well, newspapers have interviews, so... that's new, right? Meanwhile, the Newsrooms have several articles awaiting review right now. The meaning of "news"... well, newspapers can bring up something old but make the story new. I wonder about Wikinews... --George Ho (talk) 02:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC); mostly struck, 16:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * "notably including being our judiciary body of last resort" - when the last case request is from over 5 years ago, is this venue really necessary anymore? Especially considering that much larger projects don't have an ArbCom. "ArbCom is an essential safeguard" - how can it be a safeguard, if there is only one active user on it, and 3 editors have voted on the candidates (thus not giving it much standing)? And finally, without copy-pasting from WN:AC, what specifically has this ArbCom done in the last year? Is there a mailing list where discussions take place? Are there official statements that are made on behalf of it? etc. I wonder if there is more time spent setting up the elections and finding enough candidates to run than to officially discharge the duties. --Rschen7754 02:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You're going right down the line of Wikipedian misconceptions/misrepresentations about Wikinews. I could spend several times the length of your post just pointing out your misconceptions, sentence by sentence; but I have a principle that when the density of misapprehensions gets that high it's no longer reasonable to try to correct them all, one oughtn't try.  (The BS about "1 active user" does suggest either remarkable ignorance of how en.wn works, or deliberate trolling.  The lack of a clear way to distinguish the two is part of the reason for the discussion cut-off threshold: an anti-Wikinews troll would love for me to waste long hours sparring with them instead of doing productive work on the project.)  --Pi zero (talk) 04:00, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

 * George Ho; you demand a lot from the project that is a collaboration. The editors here work hard. And you want us to invest all of our time on Wikinews? Were you on the project last year, when Pi zero used to stay up all night to tackle all of the articles in the RQ? Were you on the project when he helped the newcomers help understand how to do things? Were you there when he tackled "On the campaign trail in the USA" articles? Do you know how much he has contributed to this project? It is easy for authors to blame the reviewers when they don't find their article edited hours after submission. I felt that. But you have no idea how much responsibility a reviewer has to carry, and how much responsibility an admin and b'crat would have. Do you know Pi zero is still working now, reviewing, when he was supposed to sleep. Do you know anything from the lives of the other Wikinewsies? I have seen many people criticising Pi zero, but George Ho, I tell you one thing: Pi zero, even with the project responsibilities, does better even if there were ten George Hos.
 * ArbCom exists to solve the dispute, not to create dispute to show there is a need for ArbCom. Just like the Supreme Courts does not exist to create some cases and work on it to show that a court is important, it exists to solve any dispute. Do you hear anything about the court cases when there are no pending cases? Think about a court on taluka level. Is ArbCom "necessary" if the last case was five years ago? You never know you need it tomorrow. You don't build hospital after people fall sick.
 * From what I understand; neither of two understands the role of ArbCom. acagastya 04:12, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I looked at the list of six arbitrators, and only one has made more than 5 edits after December 31, 2016. If you are looking at a different measure of activity, then please clarify what it is, rather than resorting to personal attacks. --Rschen7754 05:33, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Lack of activity? What will a judge do if there is no pending case? ArbCom is there to resolve dispute. Writing a news article has nothing to do with being a member of the committee. It is up to them if they wish to write/review an article, this is a volunteer project. People are free to write what they like. Nobody can force them to write anything. William S. Saturn, who writes bout the presidential elections wrote On the campaign trail in the USA articles each month. Have you even seen the size of those articles? Do you know how valuable those articles are? Just drawing a line after 2016 to waste everyone's time? I don't understand why do you care of what Wikinews does, when you don't edit Wikinews? Instead of wasting everyone's time, why don't you write some articles, understand the infrastructure, and try to figure out how things work here? acagastya 05:50, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * (You know, acagastya, I remember brianmc challenging a troublemaker to try writing some articles, once; up till then they'd just been mouthing off in comments space, but they then turned rather quickly into possibly the single nastiest troll we've ever had, receiving a community ban from en.wn. I'm pretty sure brianmc never again invited a troublemaker to write articles.)  --Pi zero (talk) 06:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I see, that is the reason why they don't want ArbCom to exist. Now it is clear. They are bored, and want to have fun. I feel sorry for them. acagastya 06:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I apologize for comparing newspapers to Wikinews, implying success. Rereading and skimming one of past discussions, I have mostly forgotten that Wikinews doesn't have to be like other newspapers. Therefore, I struck out the whole comment. About Wikinews itself... I wish I could write more stories, but I have been busy with other projects lately. Seeing stories at Newsroom, I figured that Wikinews can still thrive. I guess the "newsworthiness" has become perennial, so I also struck out that part out. Still, "Wikipedians" are mentioned. In their defense, I figured that most Wikipedians don't find Wikinews useful (probably due to its structure), so they created articles about current events at Wikipedia lately.

I appreciate your defending Pi zero and thankless efforts on helping Wikinews survive. And I thank you for your efforts on helping out the ArbCom. Just wondering... for future's sake, if a troublemaker tries to volunteer as an election committee member, would that troublemaker successfully or unsuccessfully wreck or corrupt the ArbCom? About "last year"... I was preoccupied with mostly Wikipedia. Also, I'll email you soon, acagastya (left un-pinged/unlinked intentionally). --George Ho (talk) 16:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

 * In the time I've been here, we've never had a bad-faith volunteer for the election committee. I've always kept it in mind (healthy paranoia being implicit in WN:Never assume).  Also in that time we've never stood on ceremony about volunteers for the election committee, but if there were actually a problem, we would object and not let them on.  There is, of course, a good reason for having at least two on the election committee. Btw, a point that perhaps bears emphasis:  I admit to putting much effort into keeping Wikinews going, but I haven't been doing it to preserve the status quo; a condition for undertaking it was to have a long-term plan to bring about broad growth of the project and render myself unnecessary to its support.

 * Despite all, I still would prefer not to end this on such a sour note. In the interests of communication (though not, necessarily, popularity):
 * To be clear: the size of other projects that don't choose to have an ArbCom is irrelevant to the situation of en.wn.
 * As Acagastya has remarked, I'm not the only active Arb, though I might place two caveats on that. The lesser caveat is that I believe I did read your original "one active user" remark differently than it was intended (I admit to being vary wary after a long tradition of nasty characters who wanted to dismantle/gut Wikinews, without understanding it, based on Wikipedian assumptions that are nonsensical for a news wiki).  The greater caveat is that "active" has different dynamics on en.wn than on en.wp and, moreover, there's a deeper notion one might call on-project reputation that has profound import on en.wn and really doesn't exist deeply on en.wp — the project structure of en.wn is tuned to collect and amplify reputation information about users, and it's clearly worth a hefty essay that I've been mulling over for years but am still not yet ready to write.  Re activity itself, contributions at en.wn are by nature in larger units and therefore likely to be spaced further apart, as well as being not at all straightforwardly related to edit-count (it wouldn't be surprising to have a reporter write an article in two edits, a reviewer make twenty or thirty edits while reviewing it, and those numbers say nothing at all about who spent how much more or less effort on it).  Arbs might or might not be active — as also remarked, active news production isn't part of the job description — but they've got the reputation thing.
 * In the past, the question of the value of en.wn ArbCom moving forward has been discussed by Wikinewsies of Arb-worthy repute, and one of the prevailing arguments (one of) was that in the long term, we have aspirations to grow, perhaps massively, and ArbCom is something we want to have already in place when that happens.
 * I think you're too eager to make accusations of "personal attacks".
 * --Pi zero (talk) 18:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The statement that I had "either remarkable ignorance of how en.wn works, or deliberate trolling" was completely unnecessary. I believe that I asked several legitimate questions that were replied to with unnecessary personal commentary instead.
 * I appreciate the point about William S. Saturn, but even so, there are three current arbitrators who are very inactive. I am trying to avoid naming names, but I notice one arbitrator who has made zero edits to article space since 2011, another since 2012, another since 2014. If active editors were being appointed to your Arbitration Committee, then I would have fewer concerns, but the "community" of 2-3 editors elected these inactive candidates in 2016.
 * I believe that holders of advanced rights or any committee-level position on any Wikimedia site should be active, and if they are not willing to be, they should resign or be removed. That was my primary activity when I was a steward, and I still advocate for removing inactive rights holders on many wikis. Besides the security risks and added confusion, it leads to an unhealthy perception of "lifetime adminship", bad admin behavior, and poor decisions after having lost touch with the purpose of Wikimedia (which is related to content, not "lifetime adminship").
 * For what it's worth, I do appreciate your efforts - for one, you're deleting most of the spam. --Rschen7754 00:35, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * <shrugs> You apparently believe that you know all you need to know about the situation, and that that plus good faith suffices. Unfortunately it doesn't suffice, due to the nature of what you don't know.  The basic outlines of the missing understanding have been presented to you, and you have, as far as one can tell, ignored what you were told.  There are more and less cushioned ways to say that; given the air of hostility I have perceived about your comments from the start, I've not been inclined to cushioned phrasing.  --Pi zero (talk) 01:17, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand, but I do not agree with what you said. Unfortunately, I think we will have to agree to disagree. --Rschen7754 03:45, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Regarding agreeing to disagree... I agree. (I'm bemused to consider how meta a conversation has to get before "I understand" becomes an ambiguous phrase.)  It's kind of amazing to me I'm still on wikimedia at all, after all these years, since I don't like to disagree with people.  It's sad enough to realize that some people don't share my desire to coexist peacefully; even sadder to realize that sometimes people interested in peaceful coexistence still can't agree. But I'll grant the latter is better than the former.  --Pi zero (talk) 11:25, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Just wondering... Other than main purposes (i.e. providing news), how else is Wikinews any different from other non-Wikipedia projects without ArbCom? --George Ho (talk) 01:59, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * This seems an overly broad question as stated, although I think I sort-of understand the intent behind it. I still owe DavidMCEddy an overview of Wikinews.  ---Pi zero (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * On its face, I don't think George's question is stupid, for what that's worth....but I will say that I/we/many hope (and have hoped for a while) that EN:WN would NEVER turn into a place where childish, pedestrian bickering takes over as badly as it can at EN:WP. The are A LOT of people over there who really don't know what this is over here. We grab the news, we write the news, we publish the news--that's all, that's it, nothing more. Having an ArbCom does allow some sort of body to exist to potentially adjudicate (for lack of a better word) potential disputes. --Bddpaux (talk) 15:53, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Pages created. --Pi zero (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Arbitration Committee/2017 election
 * Arbitration Committee/2017 election/Nominations and voting

Voting is now open. We have seven nominees for six slots. --Pi zero (talk) 20:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Linking to papers if it's also used as a source
On Astronomers reveal discovery of the hottest gas giant exoplanet known yet, the paper was linked under the External links section. However, in Astronomers discover smallest known star, the relevant paper was used as a source, so it was included in the source section. Since it's still the main paper of interest, should it be duplicated in an External links section, or simply left in the Sources as it currently is? -- numbermaniac  14:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * In articles of this sort that I have dealt with, we have only listed the paper once, under Sources if used. --Pi zero (talk) 15:13, 15 July 2017 (UTC)


text:
User talk:NinthTentacle

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 15:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:NinthTentacle


text: Comments:Wikinews interviews producer of horror film '6:66PM'


text:
User talk:Mede angola

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:07, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mede angola


text:
User talk:Jbyks

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:36, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jbyks


text:
User talk:Ashupriya519

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ashupriya519


text:
User talk:Miguel john

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Miguel john


text: Template:TopicDPL/Auto racing

title: Template:TopicDPL/Auto racing


text: Template:TopicDPL/Baseball

title: Template:TopicDPL/Baseball


text: Template:TopicDPL/Basketball

title: Template:TopicDPL/Basketball


text: Template:TopicDPL/Cricket

title: Template:TopicDPL/Cricket


text: Template:TopicDPL/American football

title: Template:TopicDPL/American football


text: Template:TopicDPL/Association football

title: Template:TopicDPL/Association football


text: Template:TopicDPL/Ice hockey

title: Template:TopicDPL/Ice hockey


text: Template:TopicDPL/Rugby

title: Template:TopicDPL/Rugby


text: Template:TopicDPL/Women's sports

title: Template:TopicDPL/Women's sports


text: Template:TopicDPL/Sports

title: Template:TopicDPL/Sports


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Argentina

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Argentina


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Brazil

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Brazil


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Chile

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Chile


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Mexico

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Mexico


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Venezuela

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Venezuela


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Germany

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Germany


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/France

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/France


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Italy

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Italy


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Spain

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Spain


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Greece

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Greece


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Belgium

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Belgium


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/United Kingdom


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/United States


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Canada

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Canada


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Japan

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Japan


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/South Korea

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/South Korea


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/North Korea

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/North Korea


text: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Australia

title: Template:TopicDPL/Countries/Australia


text:
User talk:167.58.67.50

Template:TopicDPL/Countries
What are all those pages you're creating? --Pi zero (talk) 18:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:167.58.67.50


text:
User talk:Urel Fils Antoni

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:16, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Urel Fils Antoni


text:
User talk:Vegasyankee

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:25, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vegasyankee


text: Category:September 2017

title: Category:September 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/30


text: Category:September 30, 2017

title: Category:September 30, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/29


text: Category:September 29, 2017

title: Category:September 29, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/28


text: Category:September 28, 2017

title: Category:September 28, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/27


text: Category:September 27, 2017

title: Category:September 27, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/26


text: Category:September 26, 2017

title: Category:September 26, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/25


text: Category:September 25, 2017

title: Category:September 25, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/24


text: Category:September 24, 2017

title: Category:September 24, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/23


text: Category:September 23, 2017

title: Category:September 23, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/22


text: Category:September 22, 2017

title: Category:September 22, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/21


text: Category:September 21, 2017

title: Category:September 21, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/20


text: Category:September 20, 2017

title: Category:September 20, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/19


text: Category:September 19, 2017

title: Category:September 19, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/18


text: Category:September 18, 2017

title: Category:September 18, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/17


text: Category:September 17, 2017

title: Category:September 17, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/16


text: Category:September 16, 2017

title: Category:September 16, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/15


text: Category:September 15, 2017

title: Category:September 15, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/14


text: Category:September 14, 2017

title: Category:September 14, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/13


text: Category:September 13, 2017

title: Category:September 13, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/12


text: Category:September 12, 2017

title: Category:September 12, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/11


text: Category:September 11, 2017

title: Category:September 11, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/10


text: Category:September 10, 2017

title: Category:September 10, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/9


text: Category:September 9, 2017

title: Category:September 9, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/8


text: Category:September 8, 2017

title: Category:September 8, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/7


text: Category:September 7, 2017

title: Category:September 7, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/6


text: Category:September 6, 2017

title: Category:September 6, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/5


text: Category:September 5, 2017

title: Category:September 5, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/4


text: Category:September 4, 2017

title: Category:September 4, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/3


text: Category:September 3, 2017

title: Category:September 3, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/2


text: Category:September 2, 2017

title: Category:September 2, 2017


title: Wikinews:2017/September/1


text: Category:September 1, 2017

title: Category:September 1, 2017


text:
User talk:Aguiar Domingos

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aguiar Domingos


text:
User talk:APIA

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:36, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:APIA


text:
User talk:Tyrese Collins

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:42, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tyrese Collins


text:
User talk:M.adham7863

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:16, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:M.adham7863


text:
User talk:Gilcks

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gilcks


text:
User talk:Sltich

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:19, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sltich


text: Talk:Anthony Scaramucci leaves role as US White House communications director after ten days


text: Comments:Anthony Scaramucci leaves role as US White House communications director after ten days


text:
User talk:Trebprod

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Trebprod


text:
User talk:Kyace

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kyace


text:
User talk:Tlahuitoltzin

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tlahuitoltzin


text:
User talk:Titfortat-skag

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Titfortat-skag


text:
User talk:M.W.B.A.B.

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:M.W.B.A.B.


text:
User talk:Rakistaradio

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 02:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rakistaradio


text:
User talk:Kartsri

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 03:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kartsri


text:
User talk:New.s

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:48, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:New.s


text:
User talk:Elijahko

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:50, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Elijahko


text:
User talk:Budzdorovonline

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:24, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Budzdorovonline


text:
User talk:Peacekeeper44

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:32, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Peacekeeper44


text:
User talk:Vihash kumar

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 05:34, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vihash kumar


text:
User talk:Anu Tripathi

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 06:13, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Anu Tripathi


text:
User talk:Patorikku31

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 06:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Patorikku31


text:
Template talk:Infobox

flagging it for tweaks
flag Infobox makes it difficult and annoying to read on mobile devices. So, should we remove infoboxes from mobile site (by adding the "desktop-only" class, it can be accomplished.) acagastya PING ME! 06:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Add fr:Modèle:Même sujet to this template. •–• 05:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll look into adding the desktop-only class. Although I also added the interwiki, it occurs to me you could have done that — interwikis and categories for the template go on the /doc page, in an includeonly block.  --Pi zero (talk) 12:58, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I think Infobox template is more complicated than any other template I have encountered -- and haven't figured out why it is make like this, or even how to make things work. I didn't know how to add iwl until now. •–• 13:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Adding interwikis to the /doc file is standard for templates that use the documentation template; it's part of the concept, to allow templates to be recategorized (as well as changing their visible documentation) without incurring server load for recomputing all the pages that transclude the template. But yes, infobox is admittedly a pretty complicated template.  I had to study the "Internals" sections of the documentation pages myself, to remind myself of how it works.  And the desktop-only thing belongs... I think... in InfosectionStart, to which I have added it.  Which is not even specific to infoboxen that use infobox; it should do the trick for almost all of the thousand-or-so infoboxen on the project that don't use infobox.  If what I did works, that is.  --Pi zero (talk) 14:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * this one is done, right? •–• 02:32, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Afaik. --Pi zero (talk) 02:37, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Infobox


text:
Talk:BBC News Online

BBC News Online refers to the website service of BBC News, while BBC refers to the broadcasting service which I think is an important distinction to not have this redirect. Since we're citing the news source, it's better to link to BBC News Online. —mikemoral (talk) 07:30, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * What would you say about BBC News? acagastya PING ME! 07:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I've found a couple of articles about BBC News (BBC News website expands RSS license terms to allow commercial use and BBC newsreader sacked after conviction for wounding teenager). Those fit in Category:BBC. I don't think that BBC News Online should redirect to the category. We have used the site often as a source. I think it's better to link to w:BBC News Online since I think it's more important to link to information about the news agency rather than to our category for the BBC. —mikemoral (talk) 06:45, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * we need at least five articles to create a category page. But what is true for BBC news, must be applicable for BBC news online. acagastya PING ME! 08:43, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we can create a cat for BBC News with three articles, rather than five. The question in my mind is, if we had a category for BBC News, would it be acceptable to redirect "BBC News Online" to "Category:BBC News", or would it still be needful to send the online variant to en.wp?  --Pi zero (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * There are some categories in football (soccer) like the 2011 Women's World Cup or 2014 World Cup which has just one story. Question is, how often are we going to write about BBC for it to have an independent category with some value. (as a football fan, it is disappointing to see 2014 FIFA World Cup category without any important articles) Those detailed categories should exist if someone is going to (or on the bigger scale, someone is willing to) write about it. acagastya PING ME! 17:54, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * There are a few one- or two-article categories, yes. Afaik most of them either were created by someome who wasn't aware of standard practice at the time, or were created by accident; and either way they didn't seem worth going out of our way to delete.  In (I suspect) at least a couple of cases I've created a category for someone when we wrote their obituary, even though we only had one previous article about them, because I get kind of sentimental about people in that situation — just as it seems we ought to remember them with an obit, I also want to provide a category.  And of course we created a category for each country in the world regardless of whether we had any articles about it, and then set out to write at least one article that would go in each of those cats (though I've a memory we missed one).  --Pi zero (talk) 18:11, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

well, creating a page just because something else exist, is itself wrong. acagastya PING ME! 18:19, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * We've mentioned a bunch of different occasional practices here; which one are you particularly criticizing? --Pi zero (talk) 19:07, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * In general => . I was not critisising -- I was just pointing out. acagastya PING ME! 06:39, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't really proposing a new category, but rather I don't think this redirect is necessary. If there's more articles about/related to BBC News itself, then a Category:BBC News should be made. I still think that BBC News Online should link to the en.wp page, but if there's a cat for BBC News I don't see why not redirect it there. —mikemoral (talk) 09:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. If we can create Category:BBC News, I'd be in favor of doing so.  If we do create that cat, I agree it would be fine for this redirect to go there.  I don't yet have a fully formed opinion on whether this redirect is appropriate to Category:BBC, in absence of the narrower category, nor the redirect .  --Pi zero (talk) 11:37, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:BBC News Online


text:
User talk:KavitapuVinay

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 07:42, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:KavitapuVinay


text:
User talk:MadisonBorn549

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 08:11, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:MadisonBorn549


text:
User talk:Gantyadadurgamohan

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 08:23, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gantyadadurgamohan


text:
User talk:Nario2008

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:10, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nario2008


text:
User talk:Ladislau Lucas

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 09:27, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ladislau Lucas


text:
User talk:Dmeenagh

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:09, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dmeenagh


text:
User talk:Vikram.jethwani

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:23, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vikram.jethwani


text:
User talk:みやぞん

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 10:26, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:みやぞん


text:
User talk:Scarecroe

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 12:06, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Scarecroe


text:
User talk:Said kil

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Said kil


text:
User talk:Osvaldo Bernado

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Osvaldo Bernado


text:
User talk:Rohitchauhan714

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rohitchauhan714


text:
User talk:GoalsOverSuicidedotOrg

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:37, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:GoalsOverSuicidedotOrg


text:
User talk:Rudebwoy parke

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:47, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rudebwoy parke


text:
User talk:Afakih

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 14:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Afakih


text:
User talk:Flairba

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 15:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Flairba


text:
User:Flairba

hi

title: User:Flairba


text:
User talk:Gracestudio

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 15:12, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gracestudio


text:
User talk:Nasirkhanimahan

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:06, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nasirkhanimahan


text:
User talk:Arrycad

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Arrycad


text:
User talk:Samuel de Araújo Santos

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:27, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Samuel de Araújo Santos


text:
User talk:Alberto jaime

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 16:34, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alberto jaime


text:
User talk:Daishii

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Daishii


text:
User talk:Schwarzenbergika

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Schwarzenbergika


text:
User talk:BryanThyer5920

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:BryanThyer5920


text:
User talk:FaustinaD

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:00, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:FaustinaD


text:
User talk:Nonnulla

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nonnulla


text:
User talk:The square

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 19:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:The square


text:
User talk:Kelvin0727

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kelvin0727


text:
User talk:Doro Chocollat

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Local uploads
As a precaution, I've blocked this account pending explanation of your local uploads. You may explain on this page. --Pi zero (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Doro Chocollat


text:
User talk:Pringzarrah

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:31, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pringzarrah


text:
User talk:Professorkarenwilliams

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 20:55, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Professorkarenwilliams


text:
User talk:Kishankansara

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:04, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kishankansara


text:
User talk:Netherrakk

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Netherrakk


text:
User talk:Milton Alberto C.Ramos

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Milton Alberto C.Ramos


text:
User talk:Yota Rikka

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 22:59, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Yota Rikka


text:
User talk:Mfon Daniel

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mfon Daniel


text:
User talk:Seattlecare

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 00:27, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Seattlecare


text:
User talk:Joseph philip

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 02:18, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Joseph philip