Talk:Global Witness reports almost 200 environmental activist killings in 2023

npov

I am concerned this might be sourced basically from one report as the source, and Wikinews articles are not press releases. Unfortunately, I cannot guarantee that this will cause issue with publishing. I cannot make such a decision without consulting the sources fully (which I cannot do currently, I am on a mobile device and not fully here). Think this note may be useful to the contributors, and possibly to the reviewer. Gryllida (talk) 10:29, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay. So some of the details are only in one source but most in both of them. Some of my previous articles were also said not be "synthesis articles", because their sources did not have unique information. But the way I have understood, this is not required. Please see my question in the Water Cooler/Assistance -page (Which never got answered and removed for some reason. Perhaps I ought to re-add it). Lejar (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Did it get archived after some time?

The requirement, as I understand it, is to present information from different entities. (So if Russia published information about a war related event, it is important to see how it was reported by USA or Ukraine, for example. If someone said a government is failing, what did that government say?)

These two sources are quite different. The first one is focused on Philippines and the second one about Columbia and a few other places. It is just that they both report on the report; if there are any comments from government authorities (as I understood they are the ones accused of not maintaining adequate order) they could be useful to add. Gryllida (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

@Lejar from Reuters [1] This does have a statement from Columbia's government -- and that they are working on another response. Mooreheadmimi (talk) 23:00, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I have now included information on the Columbian goverment response. Lejar (talk) 18:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

@Lejar, @Gryllida, @Mooreheadmimi: I'd be a bit hesitant about publishing as is. Aside from the single paragraph on Colombia's response, it does seem to be only reporting what Global Witness asserts. We're at the point where it's nearly stale, but if there's been responses since September 10, it could help with freshness. Have any of the governments (besides Colombia) responded? Or perhaps have they rejected GW's claims? —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 03:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

No, I could not find any article with responses from other governments than Columbia. I did find this though, but it doesn't deal with government responses.

I guess I will try and gatwick this article if other POVs get posted at some point. Lejar (talk) 18:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

the How

I recommend adding a note how the counting was made. Who was responsible for classifying the killed victims as "activists", how did they do it, and for preparing the tallies? Gryllida (talk) 10:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

This information is not available in my sources nor in any other news articles written the Global Witness report (AFAICS). In the actual report by Global Witness this information can be found (At least in some part), but should I include it as a source, there'd be no need for the other sources (And there's requirement of at least two sources for Wikinews articles). Lejar (talk) 19:16, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I think you can include it as a source still as it provides additional information about the process. I agree that the other sources become kind of redundant then. I have not encountered this situation before. If an external response, e.g. from a government, is found and included, as noted in previous section, this could resolve the problem somewhat. Gryllida (talk) 21:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

@Lejar Definitely add in the actual source as it does go into detail regarding the methodology of their study. The study states to meet their criteria to be determined a "defender" -- "a case must be supported by the following available information:

Credible, published and current online sources of information.

Details about the type of act and method of violence, including the date and location.

Name and biographical information about the victim.

Clear, proximate and documented connections to an environmental or land issue."

It also includes information about why these figures are likely an underestimate and why they update -- or remove people who were previously included in the list. Mooreheadmimi (talk) 23:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I added information about the methodologies used in compiling the report. Lejar (talk) 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

the headline

Headline is so last year. I would recommend to change it to something more newsy, like "..., [name of organization] reports". Gryllida (talk) 10:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Done Lejar (talk) 19:05, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. 👍🏻 Gryllida (talk) 21:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Review of revision 4798183 [Not ready]

Revision 4798183 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 23:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not ready: Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Insufficient coverage of responses from governments, which is a NPOV issue. Please view the talk page of the article for details. 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 4798183 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 23:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not ready: Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Insufficient coverage of responses from governments, which is a NPOV issue. Please view the talk page of the article for details. 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.