Talk:Open Rights Group holds first conference in London

Original research

I attended ORGCon in my press capacity, identifying myself as a Wikinews editor at all times. Some of my notes are handwritten and the digital ones are a bit garbled -- my battery died early on in the day. I've refreshed my memory at one or two points by reading back the Twitter feed with hashtag #orgcon from the day of the conference. I attended the keynote sessions, "Your Shout", the "Student Groups" workshop, "Open BBC", "Web-blocking" and "ACTA: A Shady Business". --81.100.247.174 (talk) 23:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Claiming this article and these notes. --Killing Vector (talk) 23:16, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Review of revision 1065680 [Failed]

Revision 1065680 of this article has been reviewed by Amgine (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 01:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: There are a few online resources about this event which might improve the verifiability. Style was not reviewed. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 1065680 of this article has been reviewed by Amgine (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 01:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: There are a few online resources about this event which might improve the verifiability. Style was not reviewed. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Review of revision 1065680 [Passed]

Revision 1065680 of this article has been reviewed by Diego Grez (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 1065680 of this article has been reviewed by Diego Grez (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Image credit

As I recall, we're talking about an accredited reporter here. "Killing Vector" as an image credit just looks unprofessional. What is wrong with an unlinked-from real name? I know not everyone is as foolhardy as myself, and prepared to put their real name on stuff. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 05:12, 27 July 2010 (UTC)