Welcome to Wikinews

A nice cup of coffee for you while you get started

Getting started as a contributor
How to write an article
  1. Pick something current?
  2. Use two independent sources?
  3. Read your sources before writing the story in your own words?. Do choose a unique title? before you start.
  4. Follow Wikinews' structure? for articles, answering as many of who what when where why and how? as you can; summarised in a short, two- or three-sentence opening paragraph. Once complete, your article must be three or more paragraphs.
  5. If you need help, you can add {{helpme}} to your talkpage, along with a question, or alternatively, just ask?

  • Use this tab to enter your title and get a basic article template.
    [RECOMMENDED. Starts your article through the semi-automated {{develop}}—>{{review}}—>{{publish}} collaboration process.]

 Welcome! Thank you for joining Wikinews; we'd love for you to stick around and get more involved. To help you get started we have an essay that will guide you through the process of writing your first full article. There are many other things you can do on the project, but its lifeblood is new, current, stories written neutrally.
As you get more involved, you will need to look into key project policies and other discussions you can participate in; so, keep this message on this page and refer to the other links in it when you want to learn more, or have any problems.

Wikipedia's puzzle-globe logo, © Wikimedia Foundation
Wikipedia's puzzle-globe logo, © Wikimedia Foundation
  Used to contributing to Wikipedia? See here.
All Wikimedia projects have rules. Here are ours.

Listed here are the official policies of the project, you may be referred to some of them if your early attempts at writing articles don't follow them. Don't let this discourage you, we all had to start somewhere.

The rules and guides laid out here are intended to keep content to high standards and meet certain rules the Wikimedia Foundation applies to all projects. It may seem like a lot to read, but you do not have to go through it all in one sitting, or know them all before you can start contributing.

Remember, you should enjoy contributing to the project. If you're really stuck come chat with the regulars. There's usually someone in chat who will be happy to help, but they may not respond instantly.

The core policies
Places to go, people to meet

Wiki projects work because a sense of community forms around the project. Although writing news is far more individualistic than contributing to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, people often need minor help with things like spelling and copyediting. If a story isn't too old you might be able to expand it, or if it is disputed you may be able to find some more sources and rescue it before it is listed for deletion.

There are always discussions going on about how the site could be improved, and your input is of value. Check the links here to see where you can give input to the running of the Wikinews project.

Find help and get involved
Write your first article for Wikinews!

Use the following box to help you create your first article. Simply type in a title to your story and press "Create page". Then start typing text to your story into the new box that will come up. When you're done, press "save page". That's all there is to it!

It is recommended you read the article guide before starting. Also make sure to check the list of recently created articles to see if your story hasn't already been reported upon.

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 18:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Please see my review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 19:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Explosions kill four in Nebraska town in United StatesEdit

Quick review of the article reveals there have been major updates to this story (arrest made). Please update the article and resubmit. Thanks, SVTCobra 16:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Wikinews does not have and does not seek to have a notability guideline similar to that of Wikipedia. Local news is encouraged, bearing in mind it should be written for an international audience. Mundane things that might get published in ultra-local newspapers are discouraged, however. See Wikinews:Content guide for more information. Cheers, SVTCobra 22:56, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, I'm aware of that. I didn't intend that as a negative thing, just as an observation that the articles here trend towards local, non-controversial news. And also that there aren't many articles in total, because of an unfortunate lack of contributors.--Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) 18:24, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abandoned articlesEdit

When tagging articles as {{abandoned}} it is best (though not strictly required) to include the current date as the first parameter. To do this easily use {{subst:aband}} which will automatically add the date. Cheers, SVTCobra 04:18, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Minus the Hobo Tourism article that had been sitting for awhile, congrats on getting the first Wikinews article in more than a month published! Johnson524 (talk) 01:30, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! It was just pure luck, actually, RockerballAustralia happened to be finalizing his own article, and he reviewed it right then. But it definitely felt good to see some sign of life on the Main Page. Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) 03:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ha, I just realized I wrote "some sign of life" in reference to an obituary! Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) 03:50, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you're looking for any Ukraine-related stuff to write about, there's Russia banning oil sales to the G7 nations or the US attempting to muster the legislative support for Ukraine aid. Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) 04:11, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, I definitely hope to write more for Wikinews in the future 🙂 Johnson524 (talk) 15:23, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thank you for your patience.Edit

im sorry, i don't waste your time but thank you for helping out. Cheers!!! DallasWinsten61 (talk) 03:22, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's not a waste of time at all. Helping articles get published is a good way for me to lend a hand. Any and all contributors are welcome here, we definitely have a shortage of writers and reviewers. Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) 03:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unfortunately English WikiNews does have less activity then usual. DallasWinsten61 (talk) 03:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes. I'm glad that you chose Wikinews; out of all the Wikimedia projects, we have the least activity, but we're also perhaps the friendliest and most reader-dedicated wiki (as evidenced by the fact that the Wikinews ArbCom could fade out of existence with no significant repercussions for the community; there weren't any disputes anymore). Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) 03:50, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just hope English Wikinews doesn't retire!!!!! DallasWinsten61 (talk) 03:52, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Opinion please on Hazard article, I hope it don't go Stale!!! DallasWinsten61 (talk) 03:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just made a couple edits to put things in order. The style of Wikinews articles was confusing to me until I read WN:PYRAMID, which is basically: put the information in order from most important to least important, so how long Eden Hazard played for Belgium would be before the team's Instagram post about him.
It's good that you're aware of the staleness issue, but it's not a problem right now, since articles go stale after 5-7 days.
Unfortunately, I am not a reviewer, so I can't move the article toward publication. Hopefully one of them is online soon. Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) 04:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed, thank you. DallasWinsten61 (talk) 04:44, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, this article isn't abandoned and I've submitted it for review. Are there any other changes that need to be made before it is ready for review? If so, please let me know. Samuel Kirwin (talk) 18:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, technically it isn't abandoned because you haven't abandoned it, but that's usually the tag we use to indicate staleness: unfortunately, the article has gone stale as the 5-7 day freshness window has passed and no reviewers (I'm not one of them) have reviewed it.
I hope this unfortunate occurrence (sadly, not uncommon on today's English Wikinews) does not deter you from continuing to write here; I can see you have potential.
If you have the time, you can try to find new material to refresh the story, if there are new developments, or attempt original reporting, although that's a more difficult route; an interview might be the only type of original reporting it would be practical to conduct (assuming you don't live in Sicily, in which case you could take it much further and investigate the conditions of the area presently). Heavy Water (talk) 18:36, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand. Thanks for clearing that up. Samuel Kirwin (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How is it my fault that the USA Wins World Cup article is stale?Edit

I finished it in about a day, and everything from here is that there are no reviewers. Is it fair to delete a perfectly good article just because no reviewer exists to actually review it? RPI2026F1 (talk) 16:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's not your fault at all and no, it's not fair at all. I've had the same thing happen to 6 of my articles-most of my articles.
It's crushing when it happens, but the reviewers would not approve a stale article.
Consider this: what would you think as a reader if you went to the English Wikinews' Facebook or Twitter feed right now and saw a new post about the US being eliminated from the World Cup, which started, "On December 4..." It would be laughable. The same thing if it was advertised as news on the Main Page (although our Main Page still lists articles from September, but at least they were published then). Heavy Water (talk) 17:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Honestly I feel like unless there's a guarantee that articles will be reviewed by 7 days, the option to make new articles should be disabled. RPI2026F1 (talk) 14:02, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: recent editsEdit

The article Taliban bar Afghan women from higher education follows British and Commonwealth spelling customs, which you reverted with edits eg 'fulfil', 'co-ordinated'. Per the style guide: "On Wikinews we generally follow either the spelling patterns of the subject of the article (British English for articles about the UK, American English for those about the US, etc), or those of the article's first author." Just as I, a reviewer, do not 'correct' American spelling norms, I ask Commonwealth norms be respected in kind. JJLiu112 (talk) 23:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Furthermore, the link to Asia was made as it is an internal category for people wanting to read more Wikinews articles about Asia—a Wikipedia link to South Asia would be for people wanting to read more about what South Asia is. Generally, we apply the former more liberally than the latter. Thanks nonetheless for the spirit of your edits, they are greatly appreciated. JJLiu112 (talk) 23:50, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@JJLiu112: Thank you, I was not aware of that about "fulfil" and "co-ordinated". Heavy Water (talk) 00:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi > Said Haines: "Essentially, we just had to put together a case to demonstrate that there was a larger playing group out there, that's of a higher quality player, that we could essentially tap into. https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Brothers_Sunshine_Coast_to_join_A_grade_rugby_union_competition_on_Australia%27s_Sunshine_Coast

Missing the end of quotation marks ("). Nigirii (talk) 15:37, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nigirii: Thank you for pointing this out, it is a common grammatical error. It appears another user has now fixed it. Heavy Water (talk) 16:21, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It has been fixed, but it doesn't show up in the "view". Nigirii (talk) 17:05, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Correct. Because of how the page is set up, it is only displayed in the "Pending changes" tab between "Read" and "Edit". This change will be merged into the "Read" view when a reviewer approves it. Heavy Water (talk) 17:38, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I nominated you for Reviewer status. You could certainly use the permission. Cheers, SVTCobra 12:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SVTCobra: Thank you greatly. I did not think I was qualified for that, but I am much honored to accept on the nomination page and see where that goes. I'm supposed to partake in an "apprentice" review of an article with an experienced reviewer, right? Heavy Water (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A longer tenure is probably normal, but you are doing really well and we need all hands on deck to keep this ship afloat. SVTCobra 00:31, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! Heavy Water (talk) 00:40, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Let's take a quick breath: Have you been made an Accredited Reporter here yet?--Bddpaux (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bddpaux: No, which was part of why I didn't expect this at all...I applied for accreditation, as I had already planned to, yesterday. I completely understand your reservations. Heavy Water (talk) 18:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Congrats, Again!Edit

Hello Heavy Water, I hope you're doing well. While I haven't edited on Wikinews for a little while now, I hope you know that all of your work here has been very appreciated, by me, and all of those who view the site. It's awesome to see so much life on the main page again when I log onto the site, and I'm honored to link the articles that get passed on their appropriate Wikipedia pages. Keep up the outstanding work and congratulations on your nomination for reviewer status. Cheers! Johnson524 (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Johnson524: Thank you! It is my honor to be able to contribute to this wiki, which can now once again call itself Wikinews, not Wikirecenthistory. If you feel like writing, now would certainly be a good time, as the reviewers have returned, and, in fact, we have the opposite problem: not enough writers! So any contributions you could make would be very welcome. The reviewership nomination kind of took me by surprise, but I like it. Cheers, Heavy Water (talk) 04:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow, that was a speedy response! If the reviewers have returned, why not, I would love to write again. Thank you for the encouragement 🙂 Johnson524 (talk) 05:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC) (Wikirecenthistory lol)Reply[reply]


For the record, if you don't want to clutter up your user page, you can create a 'sandbox page' eg User:pi zero/sandbox. Up to you. JJLiu112 (talk) 09:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JJLiu112: Yes, I know, thanks. I was using my sandbox for something else. Heavy Water (talk) 13:53, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Well, this is HORRIBLY past due!

  The Order of the Humble Pencil

For completing 5 edits.

Great work! Keep it up!--Bddpaux (talk) 15:59, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bddpaux: Thanks! I already took the liberty of awarding myself the Wikinews Intern trophy. Heavy Water (talk) 16:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Which is completely appropriate. This one is (unofficially, of course) the first award that someone might give to you here.--Bddpaux (talk) 16:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Award 2Edit

...as is this!

  The Order of the Modest Pencil

For getting your first article published!

Excellent work!--Bddpaux (talk) 16:01, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


A long overdue token of gratitude from I'm sure the whole community to recognise and commend a most diligent and voracious contributor with plenty of room to grow. JJLiu112 (talk) 19:05, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much! I'm very glad to have earned it! Heavy Water (talk) 19:06, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re Kyiv mayor commentEdit

Hi Heavy Water

In the article, it says 'Ukraine alleges this tactic is part of an offensive against civilians.' If you have time and familiarity with sources, could you please change the wording to clarify which person or authority is making this allegation, please (cf. WN:Attribution).

Also, are there second sources on ".We have a deficit of energy around 30% right now in Kyiv"? Without such additional sources, the article reads like telling the important quote of one person, not substantiated by independent evidence.

Regards, -- Gryllida (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gryllida: 1. The Euronews source which I used to reference that says "Kyiv" (i.e., the Ukrainian government). I can change it to "The Ukrainian government alleges..." if you'd like. 2. This says there was a deficit from around Sunday. I wouldn't have considered this newsworthy were it not for the fact that he has information from local experts (he's only relaying that). Heavy Water (talk) 01:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Heavy Water, for the note. Perhaps 'Euronews reported, Kyiv alleged this tactic was part of an offensive against civilians'? Would suggest to add the Yahoo News link in list of references -- it looks sort of like what I am looking for -- and mention relevant information from it in the article. If there's any more information available about the deficit, it'd be cool to include also.
Note I have communicated with people from Russia and one of them mentioned recently that (according to what the Russian TV says perhaps?) the electricity is available by time (i.e., for N hours per day every day) and the claim that the civilians 'lack' electricity may be misleading, i.e. 'Millions of Ukrainians now reportedly lack electricity'. It would be great to see whether there are reliable sources supporting it, and/or specifying which cities or towns lack electricity, whether or not there is this N hours per day thing or not, etc. Gryllida (talk) 02:04, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will bring the Yahoo article in then (hopefully via the Kyiv Independent directly). Russian state media would certainly misrepresent the situation. CNN was who said they lack electricity, though they didn't go much further. I'd say CNN is reliable enough to not require attribution. I don't think the attribution to Euronews is necessary either, I've seen much advice by Wikinewsies not to clutter the article with mentions of other outlets, much like how we don't use inline referencing, and no one is claiming Ukraine didn't say this. Heavy Water (talk) 02:27, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

new articleEdit

Check out my new article. It would be better if you check the article so that I can submit it for review. DRC-B5 (talk) 06:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


My English not so gd... Pecerasop747 (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Heavy water: Pecerasop747 (talk) 22:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I got the message, thanks. I replied on Talk:Oakland California shooting. Heavy Water (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Accredited reporterEdit

For becoming an accredited reporter, what conditions do I need to satisfy? DRC-B5 (talk) 16:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DRC-B5: Uhh, I'll assume this is a hypothetical and you're not seeking accreditation right now. Wikinews:Accreditation policy should outline the expectations, but it doesn't make clear enough two things:
1. Accreditation is to aid in original reporting, but you can certainly do original reporting without accreditation; accreditation only helps you confirm to third parties you are a journalist, which can be crucial in some places.
2. Accreditation requires Wikinewsies to place a lot of trust in the reporter; with accreditation, Wikinews is placing its reputation in their hands. Wikinews:Never assume requires us to rely on individuals' earned reputations-that is, if we think we can trust them after knowing them a while. I'm not saying other Wikinewsies doesn't trust you, or anyone else; I'm saying Wikinewsies prefer to have known someone for a while before accrediting them. (This sounds like something Pi zero would say, and I never knew him, though I feel like I did).
So, I would encourage you to keep writing, become familiar with the accreditation policy, and hopefully get some articles published. From what I've seen, you learn quickly. Heavy Water (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmm this takes a lot of time for reaching such position. Thanks for your explanation. I just want to get familiar with this project. DRC-B5 (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DRC-B5: No problem. A lot of time, not necessarily. I only really joined Wikinews in August, and I requested accreditation this month, receiving a fair amount of support. Familiarity with the project and its people is certainly the best way to earn trust. Heavy Water (talk) 17:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi, Heavy Water. I know your Hipkins-NZ article was next in line and only a few days from getting stale, but I thought you and JJLiu112 were working it out and I remain confident it will get published. Madelaine is already familiar with the article and has probably read the sources quite a bit already. I am trying to optimize our output. The choice of British English in the recent article and whether to defer to author (and source) choice of spelling is interesting. I left it "defence" because to a reader it would be more consistent with all the references to "honour" (not "honor"). I didn't want to mix it up (for a lack of a better term). Cheers, SVTCobra 04:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SVTCobra: Yes, I certainly understand your reasoning on the review queue, we do have a problem where her (excellent) articles aren't reviewed. Even if I wouldn't do so myself, I get the spelling thing, and have resolved the talk section. Heavy Water (talk) 05:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
More to the point of why I gave you an early nomination for reviewer: If you look at my edit history, or rather the edit history of the article, it took me hours. Perhaps longer than it took to write (I have no way of knowing). Reviews are tedious and require you to look at each fact and quote in the article. I think you are a good candidate because you find typos in old articles as well as policy pages and guidelines. We need to be pedantic. While the world might find it an insult we should take pride in it. SVTCobra 07:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SVTCobra: Well, it's easy to focus on spelling when the rest of the article looks just fine. I do try to be accurate and detailed to avoid mistakes or even a lack of clarity. Thank you, Heavy Water (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry about the rapid-fire messages about WN:Fair use, but it is a potential liability for the WMF. Either way, I think there are plenty of alternatives. And never let GRP get under your skin. Cheers, SVTCobra 03:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SVTCobra: No, it is certainly necessary, copyright violations are serious. I requested deletion because I wasn't able to reduce the resolution and I, in fact, found a different but suitable image. And his message was only a minor nuisance, but thanks. Heavy Water (talk) 03:39, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, it is serious. I was in rapid-fire mode due to writing my own article at the same time. And I can't remember the exact image you you used (and tired to reduce), but was it from this? If so it was already not timely if you look at their caption. It is from November (or rather earlier because that's when the Standard got it). It's just a stock photo. Commons:Category:Woolacombe has several images of farmland. If Woolacombe is not pertinent, I am sure you can find a photo on Commons for British farmland. Cheers, SVTCobra 04:00, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The image was also used there yes (that's one of my sources). I did feel it was more relevant, but I'm now using this one. Heavy Water (talk) 04:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Can you report ‎1L0VEFAKENEWS69420 to admins noticeboard? DRC-B5 (talk) 17:15, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It wouldn't be much help at the moment; there are no admins online. When SVTCobra logs in next, they'll check Recent changes and block the user. Heavy Water (talk) 17:16, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah! I see him much active in Wikinews. DRC-B5 (talk) 17:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


HW, can you please contribute my article in my absence as I will be inactive for this month due to my exam pressure, as I mentioned earlier. I thought I would go for deletion of them as this will be stale after few days. But SVT prevented me saying someone will contribute in my absence. You please do this as per your capacity. DRC-B5 (talk) 06:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I might be able to. However, I see you're working on a new article. I would caution you against abandoning articles so fast for new ones; it will likely result in none being published, as opposed to taking one article and focusing on it to get it published. And I think you should submit French unions strike against President Macron’s pension reform plan for review. Heavy Water (talk) 14:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But the issues pointed out by Liu is not yet fixed. Did you fixed that issue? DRC-B5 (talk) 14:47, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I thought you did, and I copyedited it, which was one of the things she advised. Heavy Water (talk) 14:49, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmm, I will keep your advice and request for deleting the new page I made. I will be active for 1 hr. So I will check again and submit for review. DRC-B5 (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah I made the corrections. Sorry for that I was too busy that I forgot what I did. DRC-B5 (talk) 15:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Misuse of user pagesEdit

Hi. I have not said or assumed that this user is going to be disruptive. Just in many projects this deliberate non-productive crosswiki founding of user pages is considered to be the misuse of user pages which they are not designed for. But it is up to you and your local rules.

Cheers, -- Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jan.Kamenicek: Sorry, by disruptive I had in mind the vandalism that got them blocked on the English Wikipedia. I should have clarified that. But, Wikinews:Never assume also forbids us from assuming the user page creation is going to be their only edit. If it's a disruptive editor's user page, we would delete it. But I don't think any of these things apply here. Thanks, Heavy Water (talk) 14:37, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

US downs Chinese balloon articleEdit

Hey, got some time for checking this. I feel some of the portions needs to be fixed. DRC-B5 (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"On Tuesday, the United Kingdom government released the Environmental Improvement Plan, pledging every English person will have "a green space or water" 15 minutes or less' walk from their home."

...by what year? Gryllida (talk) 04:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gryllida: Something I wanted to know myself. Unfortunately, it's not in the sources or the government's press release (where the sources got that information from). It is a five-year plan, so that's a possible time frame, but no specific date was attached to this goal. Heavy Water (talk) 05:12, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


That guy is too sucking my patience. DRC-B5 (talk) 17:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yep. They're one of the long-term abusers around here. Heavy Water (talk) 17:23, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I reported to IRC. DRC-B5 (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I bestowed Reviewer rights to you. I wish some more admins had voted, but it has been over a month. You only got one 'weak oppose' so I think most people trust you. I don't know if you ever met up with @Gryllida in IRC as was talked about. However, WWC2023 has only increased the bottleneck of reviews and we need more active reviewers. Congrats, SVTCobra 19:39, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SVTCobra, I cannot thank you enough for placing your trust in me. I will try to live up to that. As for IRC: yeah, the extreme time difference makes that hard. I was in once when Gryllida was in the channel, but I think they were inactive then, only still logged in. Thank you, Heavy Water (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And I intend to sight all those ancient pending changes in Category:Review now. Heavy Water (talk) 20:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, now you can sight all those typos you keep finding in recent articles and fixes to main page leads and various other pages in the depths of Wikinews. The typos you find in the archives will still be on me ;) ... but if you keep at it, you'll surely become an admin, too. Cheers, SVTCobra 05:50, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: P&GEdit

As I happen to remember some of the circumstances under which this wording was changed (and did not like how it came out), I should point out **why** it came to be. A series of community members, but one in particular, would revert changes to 'their' article by manually reverting edits one at a time. In this way they might technically avoid reverting 3+ times, as they were not reverting the exact same changes 3+ times. Thus the attempt to state one cannot revert within a single article more than three times in a day. - Amgine | t 04:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Amgine: Hmm, OK, that makes sense. I self-reverted. Heavy Water (talk) 04:29, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I thought of deciding to create another article. I will make it ready but I guess you will be offline for now. Please check my article when it is ready. And congrats for reviewer DRC-B5 (talk) 05:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, just check the article India sends new rocket, deploying 3 satellites into the orbit, when you are free, probably. DRC-B5 (talk) 17:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


While archiving some articles, I notice you tend to keep all the categories on one line separated by a space. While this does not appear to be problem technologically, it is commonplace to have them each on a separate line. This is the way I have seen categories organized across all wiki-projects. I don't know of any policy on this, but if you could, please follow convention if it is all the same to you. Cheers, SVTCobra 17:20, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SVTCobra: I do prefer them on separate lines (as with the elements of a source) and thought I always did this (here, for example). I guess that was an oversight, I'll try to pay more attention to it next time. Heavy Water (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, cool. But look at this diff which I just made. Cheers, SVTCobra 17:28, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I saw it, yes. I'll keep them on separate lines next time. Heavy Water (talk) 17:33, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the review. :-) Regards, -- Gryllida (talk) 01:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was my pleasure to do so! Heavy Water (talk) 03:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for editing, appreciated. This is an interesting story. Gryllida (talk) 01:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have withdraw review on the Murmu transfer article. I add a new article about Bangladesh president election topic, you can review on it. M:DRC (talk) 14:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, I'll do so when I have time. Heavy Water (talk) 14:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I want to know about my feedback so that I can improve it from the future. Thanks M:DRC (talk) 17:45, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you mean on {{speedy}} tags? I was only saying it seemed more like encyclopedic content or editorializing than spam/advertising. Heavy Water (talk) 17:48, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nah, about my contributions in Wikinews. How am I making my articles? Etc. M:DRC (talk) 18:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see. I think my comments here and Chaetodipus' here are the most relevant. This essay by the late Pi zero might be helpful. Heavy Water (talk) 19:01, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DRC-B5: Another thing would be the reviewer's edits and their edit summaries. I find looking at the "diffs", like this one, of those edits, can be helpful for picking up smaller things not mentioned in the review comments. You can easily see what was changed and why, avoiding the same problems on your future articles. Heavy Water (talk) 05:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok then, I will do my best M:DRC (talk) 05:37, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your edit to SGEdit

Please do not re-open this argument. There are times to choose a single preferred term for clarity in a reference guide. While using the term 'stop' may be preferred for a portion of English speakers, there are other terms used in other contexts and a guide cannot support every possible option consistently. Allowing more than one has, in the past, resulted in wheel wars, and this was the compromise text for the Style Guide.

There is also guidance on how policies are created and updated. Generally speaking, a substantive change to an established policy should be discussed on-wiki with active project participants. If there is consensus for a change, make sure to ad a link to the discusion's revisions so others can see when/where/how the policy was changed. (Yes, there is a policy to Ignore All Rules, which PiZero absolutely loathed, so if you strongly feel you should be able to arbitrarily alter the policies of the project at will, but then you must not argue if others do the same to your changes. Amgine | t 18:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Obviously one is not supposed to substantively change policy without consensus. I made my edit to clarify that period is the preferred term (as one who prefers "period" I would have no interest in changing it).
For context for anyone else:
This American term is used to describe full-stops (the British/International term). --> This is the American counterpart of the Commonwealth term full-stop.
I thought this unnecessarily elevating full-stop, in fact. I see now some meaning of "this is what SG uses" was lost, but that repeats the "Conventions" section anyway. Heavy Water (talk) 18:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Amgine. Heavy Water (talk) 18:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bulgarian police articleEdit

Hi HW, got some time for checking this. I don't like articles getting stale. M:DRC (talk) 03:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

US Interior Department approves Willow oil project in Alaska

The US Department of the Interior approved ConocoPhillips' Willow oil drill proposal in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska (NPR–A) on March 13.

[ ± ] - Image credit -

--Heavy Water (talk) 04:27, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks bro, and have a good day to you. M:DRC (talk) 04:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem! Heavy Water (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi, today I applied for accreditation request. Since I would like to continue in this wiki, I must also do some more stuff (including OR) and increase my positions. OR is the main problem for me. I am not an adult yet. So, I will be restricted to move in outside my residence. M:DRC (talk) 16:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DRC-B5: First, you are under no obligation to do OR or request accreditation, though you're more than welcome to. Also, you don't need accreditation to do OR, it just makes it easier. And I think people usually do OR around where they live. Heavy Water (talk) 16:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Make lead &c.Edit

Per the big warning that appears on the Wikinews:Make lead page, "Please do not use time sensitive words like 'today' or 'yesterday'", and I'd suggest skipping 'Sunday', 'Monday' etc. considering how quickly that can get dated too. And maybe this is a personal thing, but I think a bit of surreptitious edits are OK just so, for example, it doesn't read "The United Kingdom Home Office Thursday is to begin" or including acronyms "African Union (AU)" that aren't really necessary if it's just in a headline. JJLiu112 (talk) 03:06, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding "today and yesterday" (I went looking and found this diff), that must've been an oversight. I do try to keep the day-of-the-week dates in leads up-to-date. I wasn't sure what to do with the "The United Kingdom Home Office...", since changing the tenses didn't feel right because that was not covered by the sources as reviewed or the article... Heavy Water (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interwiki linksEdit

There's no need to add manual interwiki links to Wikinews in other languages. It is being handled through Wikidata. Pi zero opposed removing old ones (perhaps, initially fearing it would stop working), but even he did not favor adding new ones. Cheers, SVTCobra 01:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh. I saw, apparently, old ones at Category:Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (I used Wikidata only for previous categories) and I thought en.wn had an aversion to migrating interwikis to Wikidata. Thank you for clarifying. Heavy Water (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One of your deletion requestsEdit

You requested User:Get ready to snack on my poopie be deleted. While I don't think there is a lick of truth in the user's self-description, I don't think it is vandalism. I don't like the username anymore than I liked your first username, but again, I don't think it violates policy. Basically, it just discourages "offensive" name without defining them. Cheers, SVTCobra 03:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I should have said "speedy nominations" instead of "deletion requests" as the process differs. But I think you understand. SVTCobra 03:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I thought it was likely the LTA also known as Cannot hold in my poop much longer (t · c · b), (t · c · b), and the compromiser of The Irate Communist. So preemptively tagging it. But I understand what you mean. Heavy Water (talk) 04:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Until they edit outside of their own user page, I don't think any action is needed. I mean, there can be actionable content on the user page, but we don't have that either. SVTCobra 04:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. Heavy Water (talk) 04:31, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't have checkuser privileges nor would I suggest requesting such services at this point. SVTCobra 04:24, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I know it is confusing and it took me a while to get conventions down pat, myself. But there are three basic types:

  1. dash (also called a hyphen) which is the shortest one and typically for hyphenating words, but used all over the place, sometimes incorrectly
  2. en-dash (a bit longer) which is good for separating scores of sports or votes (as in the recently published article)
  3. em-dash (even longer) which is good for interjections but with a space before and after

The reason the single dash is found incorrectly in so many places (including reputable sources) is that the other two cannot be found on a standard keyboard. We, thankfully, have the dropdown box for special characters. Further making it hard, this is probably not spelled out in our style guide, but can probably be found in resources such as The Chicago Manual of Style which is a massive tome about proper writing. I think some of the older editions might be available for free online (and they don't change much from edition-to-edition). Anyway, most of our style guide is right in line with Chicago. It is American-English centered but in my experience, British-English publications are not much different. Lastly, sometimes you will find in sources a double dash (--) which is the easy way to make an em-dash with a standard keyboard. A single dash is usually used in place of an en-dash. And there is no way I am going to go through our archives to find all the ways people have used dashes in the past. Cheers, SVTCobra 22:13, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, thank you. Heavy Water (talk) 22:14, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another resource is the AP Stylebook which I wouldn't fault anyone for following. I'm sorry if I come off as anal-retentive. Cheers, SVTCobra 22:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, no, it's fine. I'll make note of that. Heavy Water (talk) 22:31, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Typical workflow for interviews/requests for comment/etcEdit

I saw a sub-page of yours (at least I thought it was yours) where you kept notes for an interview you wanted to do. I can't find it now.

For the Willow project article I am working on, I have requested comment regarding the funding of the EIS. I doubt seriously I'll receive a response. But just in case — do you have recommendations for how to work through that? I've read through WN:OR. But I don't see where it discusses the finer mechanics of officially tracking email/correspondence, etc.

I see from your 'Crimea is a red line' article that I am to forward emails to Scoop. I assume that is Scoop@wn-reporters.org, correct?

Sorry if this should be obvious to me or if I've missed reading a document with instructions!

15:38, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Michael.C.Wright (talk) 15:38, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Michael.C.Wright: Was it my sandbox? I was keeping the questions there (diff) but replaced them with some infrastructure-related links I need to remember. Yeah, we've kinda just expected people to know how to do that stuff, which is both unfair and risky in terms of how people present Wikinews. This is compounded by the fact that email correspondence is nearly always only shared with scoop. I seem to recall one of Pi zero's goals was to set up a page to walk people through OR and make it more approachable, but that was one of the things he was never able to do. And I'm far from knowledgeable about the actual practice of OR-I've read a lot of it, but that's only my second OR. Anyways Pi recommended 'Fascinating' and 'provocative' research examines genetic elements of bipolar, schizophrenia because all correspondence is documented on the talk page there, and I tend to follow that format for my emails. A very crucial thing is how you describe your connection with Wikinews. Even accredited reporters must describe themselves as independent authors/independent researchers/freelance journalists, not as "Wikinews reporters". You may say you are hoping to publish in Wikinews, at which point I often name-drop Wikipedia for legitimacy. And you may be surprised at how responsive people can be to that. --Heavy Water (talk) 17:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And after you're done, forward everything to scoop [at] wn-reporters [dot] org, yeah. But don't send files to scoop, since those are heavy and the entire wn-reporters system is paid for by Wikinewsies (which is good, so the WMF can exercise no editorial control; send them to an active accredited reporter, who will upload them to a private file-hosting service. Heavy Water (talk) 18:30, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That definitely helps. Thank you! Michael.C.Wright (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do not know how easy it is to get a hold of William S. Saturn, but he has tremendous experience in contacting people for interviews. SVTCobra 16:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, yes. I recall his last edit was December 2021, just responding to an award on his talk page, and he hasn't edited much at enwiki, either. Heavy Water (talk) 16:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He usually gets active during election cycles. SVTCobra 16:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


the ip didn't seem suspicious, just saying though I could be wrong, thanks. Hypda (talk) 23:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hypda: It was an empty request; we get a lot of those. I do not judge suspicion, I am not a checkuser or anyone with administrative authority. Heavy Water (talk) 00:00, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair enough, thank you. Hypda (talk) 00:03, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]