Talk:Britney Spears announces she is pregnant again

Active discussions

Is this News?Edit

Who, no, why an article with such an idiotic topic was posted?

Is there a lack of news with importance above absolute zero? There are hundreds and hundreds of people which sold their souls to the Devil in exchange for talent (and were scammed like nobody else in history of mankind). Shall we publish every rumor about them?

One, this is new, entertainment news. Two, This is not a rumor as it was annouced by Britney herswlf on the show. Jason Safoutin 12:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
You have missed the point entirely. Which is: since this is the type of news which are appearing every day in exceccive quantities, why does this one gets preferential treatment? There are hundreds of pop stars in hundreds of countries which do and say something like this every day -- note that nobody was even born yet.
I fear it is you who is missing the point. Anyone can write the news here, provided it is factual and newsworthy. This is clearly both as demonstrated by the numerous sources for this story. If you would like more stories of this kind - in order that wikinews be more representative - why not consider writing them yourself? WillJenkins 14:42, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Newsworthy is the key word here. Some pop singer claims to be pregnant -- that's newsworthy? Newsworthy is something that enlightens and broadens reader's knowledge of the world, allows to make conclusions and see patterns. And no, being on CNN or BBC or wherever does not qualify a fact as newsworthy.
I certainly considered and decided not to write anything of the like -- it is NOT newsworthy.
Except that, by definition, it must be newsworthy. If it wasn't of interest to anyone then someone wouldn't have gone to the trouble of writing it up. The point is that it's better to have too many news articles than not enough. WillJenkins 15:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't feel this is worth reporting. Just delete it. Fans of Spears will look up the news on her official site. Also there are more than a dozen entertainment news websites. WillJenkins, please don't argue with this.
He has every right to argue this as you have every right. This is news IMO and its on here. Its sourced and is all facts. Unless you or anyone else can prove otherwise, then there has yet to be any actionable objections. Please respect others replies/reasons. Jason Safoutin 17:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
This is newsworthy, maybe not something you would read, but news none the less. Our own Sister sites Wikipedia and Wiktionary both have articals related to the worth of news items. Wikipedia has this artical on newsworthiness that states newsworthiness is defined by Proximity, Prominence, Timeliness, Impact, Conflict and Controversy, Uniqueness, and Human Intrest. By those standards I belive we should all aggree that this artical is allowed here and should remain. We may not be interested in it, but someone is or it wouldn't be here. It is deffently of Prominence, at the right time (not days old), it impacts people (having another brit baby scares me :P), Provides conflict (or we would not be dealing with this), and is Unique enough to spark intrest. So yes it has its own place here. --Andrew Myers 20:01, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Newsworthy?Edit

To examine whether a news article's topic should be covered, check the content guide. If a news topic is something you are not interested in but meets the guidelines, don't read it. Don't be rude about it. - Amgine | talk en.WN 17:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't revert tags with no discussionEdit

Surprised to see tag removed with no discussion; the tagger stated his reasons; what's happening here? Neutralizer 02:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the original tagger that it is not news; he just used the wrong tag. Neutralizer 02:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok...tell me how its not? its entertainment news. Thats what it is categorized as. It is also sourced properly and meets content guidlines. There is no actionable objections here. Jason Safoutin 02:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Meets guidelines, but lacks relevance. Wikinews is a resource for serious news reporting, not someones personal diary. There are a lot of events happening around the world which could use a mention. A power outage is news, not some lady announcing her pregnancy. I agree the submitter has the right to post news, but not news like this. Wikinews is a new project (I don't mean brand new, I know it has been around for some time, but many people don't know about it. I think we should be setting some minimum standards as to what merits to be on Wikinews and what does not. Just my two cents.
Not some lady...Britney Spears. A famous person. This is serious news reporting, and Wikinews is user based. Anyone can write an article based on what they think is news. As long as it meets content guidelinds, cites sources properly, and also reports on a NPOV basis. All of which this article has and all contents in the article are true. Jason Safoutin 03:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Still lacks relevance. I agree everyone has the right to report news, but like I said, we have to set some standards. Nine months from now this will not have any relevance, just like it does not now. I will say no more.
WN:CG states: "News is relevant. Being Wikinews — global and Internet-based — stories about local news may need to have their relevance explained for our international audience. Stories should appeal to a large number of people." You have only stated that it lacks relevance, you haven't said how it lacks relevance. Jason has argued that it is relevant because Britney is famous, meaning millions of people will know who she is, and certainly millions of people will be interested that she is pregnant. If you are going to disagree with him you need to respond to this argument. If you think we should "set some standards" you need to explain what those standards will be. So far all you have said is that you aren't interested in this story. - Borofkin 03:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Please see below.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:What_Wikinews_is

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:What_Wikinews_isnot

Ms Spears may have millions of fans, but this news will now affect them, maybe some teenagers who have a crush on her. I don't see how this has affected the oil prices or the American Idol finals. The standards are also explained in the links provided above. Did you know that Jessica Lynch, an Iraq war veteran, finished her first year of college? This is relevant. However an article is not put up. So my point is, there are people who have time to write about a celebrity, but not a soldier. This is sad.
Then I encourage you to write an article :) And its Mrs. Spears...she is married. Jason Safoutin 05:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Mrs. Spears, is that all you can come up with? BTW, Ms applies to both married and unmarried ladies. You still haven't shown any relevance to the news story. Have you read the links provided above?-Concerned Wikinews user
I have read the links. An this article meets all guidelines. You any everyone else have yet to prove otherwise. Jason Safoutin 15:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I have already said this news does not impact anything. Nothing has changed since this announcement. How can one prove the irrelevance of something other than by simply dismissing it? Can you please tell me how this has impacted you? Or any other fan of Ms Spears for that matter. If she was single, then yes this is a hot topic, but she is married and this is her second preganancy. She also did not announce after her first that she will have no more. Future mothers will not go to her to consult about pregnancy/labor. The only future mothers who would go to her would be her close friends. And I beleive she would have told them in person about her pregnancy. Also you haven't stated the relavance of this news other that saying that she is famous and has millions of fans. That does not imply anthing. Before replying please ask yourself how this has had an effect on you. I don't want to start a war here, please don't be offended. -Concerned Wikinews user.
90% or more of the articles I publish have absolutely no impact on me whatsoever. The fact is this: the article meets content guidlines, is sourced properly, and is formatted properly. This apparently impacts people, because if it did not, then you would not be commenting on it. Whether or not this news has an effect on me does not matter. It will have a effect on the millions of fans she has, and an effect on the millions of users who read Wikinews, as you have shown. Jason Safoutin 16:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
If you could only comprehend what you just wrote. -Concerned Wikinews user.
Yes I do. But please read WN:E. There is no need to be rude. But yet, no one has yet to prove this story is not newsworthy, according to policy. Jason Safoutin 17:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if I was rude, did not mean to be. I give up. -Concerned Wikinews user.
No problem. I am sorry that Mrs. Spears is not your fancy, and she is not mine either. But I found the news interesting and worthy. I am not attempting to imply you are wrong, but your opinion of her or my opinion of her are not supposed to matter when reporting on facts of a situation. I do hope you contimue to read and or contribute to the project...no hard feelings i hope? Jason Safoutin 18:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Return to "Britney Spears announces she is pregnant again" page.