Talk:Wikinews interviews candidate for New York City mayor Vitaly Filipchenko

transcript

@JJLiu112: YT generated transcript's link.
•–• 16:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

I had taken the liberty to verify the transcript till 16:59. I intend to finish some more part before sleeping. @JJLiu112: Special:Diff/4621239 was actually an edit conflict as you made some changes while I was copyediting -- please have a look something wasn't undone. I have not linked highway, since it was rather too trivial to link. If it is needed, let me know here, and revert the change. Also, please go through the changes of the diff. I will be reviewing the other article now.
•–• 14:57, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

OK. --JJLiu112 (talk) 15:50, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Email

Could you please forward all the email-based correspondence to scoop, @JJLiu112: and mention in brief about how you got to taking this interview, just like the previous time? That is a must, actually, and needs to be done before submitting the article for review.
•–• 04:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

My apologies, I forgot. --JJLiu112 (talk) 04:36, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Fin. --JJLiu112 (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Also the brief description about why and how you contacted the interviewee and arranged it, please.
•–• 04:39, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

I believe this is sufficient. Reached out by e-mail, then called him. That's it. --JJLiu112 (talk) 04:41, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
you still need to provide the details, @JJLiu112:. When you reached out to him, why you chose him, how you found out about him, how did you decide and how did you record. This is not only for the reviewer, but for anyone looking at it in the future trying out this on their own.
•–• 04:47, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Alright. --JJLiu112 (talk) 04:47, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Does this suffice? --JJLiu112 (talk) 04:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Still waiting for it, @JJLiu112: -- (head's up) it has to be on talk.
•–• 05:08, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Reaching out

I contacted him through a form on his web site 4 May, 2021 along with many other candidates. Roger H. replied by e-mail at 06:58 my time 5 May responding in the affirmative. I asked if 4:30 was okay at 09:40. He said yes at 21:22. Phone call occurred 15:40 on 6 May, 2021. --JJLiu112 (talk) 05:12, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

The call was recorded by mobile phone. --JJLiu112 (talk) 05:12, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Looks to me, Roger H is from the office of Vitaly Filipchenko.
•–• 05:18, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes. That is correct. --JJLiu112 (talk) 05:18, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Under review

Still? --JJLiu112 (talk) 16:54, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm starting a review. This isn't a 'criticism' per se, I'm just thinking aloud. When author started the interview, he said, "...just so I have a recording for my records." [or something of that ilk], but then it's on the article's main page. Honestly: I think we need a lot more audio around these parts. Honestly: the whole thing doesn't seem terribly contentious, but I just know how mean-spirited people can be on the interwebs and hope it doesn't turn into a THING, y'know? --Bddpaux (talk) 23:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Made it through 11:03 on the interview. I'm tired and need to take a break to eat something. So far so good. --Bddpaux (talk) 23:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

No idea what you're talking about here. What do you mean a lot more audio, and why is this a problem? I made clear this was being recorded for the purpose of later retrieval, and there is no more audio. It was a call. Also, why are you reviewing from scratch when @Acagastya: finished until 16:59? --JJLiu112 (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

And, may I add, had no problem with the schematics of the recording disclosure. --JJLiu112 (talk) 00:36, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

I obviously had too much caffeine pinging around in my brain. Well: I guess I missed that he'd listened. And, you know, there has been a lot of chatter and this brain has its limits. If you can handle the de Blasio question, I think we're set. --Bddpaux (talk) 01:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Bddpaux might not have gone through the summary of previous edits, and might have missed parts of it were already reviewed.
103.48.105.158 (talk) 02:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Review of revision 4623448 [Passed]

Revision 4623448 of this article has been reviewed by Bddpaux (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:52, 16 June 2021 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: A valuable contribution. 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 4623448 of this article has been reviewed by Bddpaux (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:52, 16 June 2021 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: A valuable contribution. 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.

Edit

{{editprotected}} The first sentence of the third paragraph in the lead says, "Incumbent Democrat mayor Bill de Blasio", but should read "Incumbent Democratic mayor Bill de Blasio", the name of the party. See Democrat Party (epithet). Heavy Water (talk) 17:52, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Done --SVTCobra 14:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)