User talk:Chiacomo/Archive 2

Latest comment: 18 years ago by Neutralizer in topic Rephrased my opposition

Thanks for discussing the issue

Chiacomo thanks for discussing the rcameonw issue further. Although the idea that rcameonw was the instigator of the de-adminship vote is not something I'm completely sold on, and thus the block appears a little like retribution. If the sockpuppets statement is true, and rcameonw is a sockpuppet (his response to the sockpuppets statement is somewhat surprising), then I think by all means Amgine was correct. I also realize that Amgine, or any admin, hardly needs an endorsement of his/her actions from me or anyone else. Had I been in his position, I might very well have taken the same course of action and I certainly wouldn't look to anyone for their approval. That being said, I do think that if we consider our little community here to be in any way enlightened there are times you should come out and explain your decisions, and I thank you for attempting to fill that role.

As to voting, I agree with you in regards to it not being anything more than workable solution. Voting is merely the tyranny of the majority, whereas consensus is when the majority and the minority can both find amicable ground.--Herda05 03:34, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for pointing out WN:A. It's definetly good to know about. I'll put a link to it on my talk page.--Herda05 04:09, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Willl watch out for that

Thanks for the tip, I'll watch out for that -MusicalAngel

Need a delete

Speedy delete on Slashdot_blowhard_berates_wikpedia by user

Thanks for discussing the issue II

Regarding the use of dateline template - although I don't feel fully-satisifed with the Wikinews convention, I can understand that use of the dateline template (over the date template) should be discouraged at least by newer users of Wikinews in favour of just writing the opening sentence (or even the headline) to be more informative. What frustrated me about the incident was that someone else was removing part of the story claiming POV/conflict of sources/not revelant/several-other-excuses. That conflict was in addition to the removal of the dateline tag without any discussion. So I'm sorry if I sounded more upset about the incident than perhaps most people would - but I'm glad it brought out discussion and further clarification in the style guide. I prefer to see more flexible use of the guidelines, and I just hate to see good information being removed from stories for apparently no good reason. Karen 17:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

confused about "archived" reference

..aren't the archives always available? Neutralizer 14:52, 20 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

ok, I'd like to do that. Could you please clear it with MrMiscellanious so that he doesn't block me for setting up such a link? (see his last edit on the cooler[1]). Neutralizer 20:09, 20 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

The Inherent Publicness of a Press Release

I'm going to check with Creative Commons on the copyright status of a press release. I assume you don't actually have any knowledge on the subject, but just kinda going with your gut right? I'll let you know what I find.

SouthEastUS 05:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Look what I found: Talk:News release
SouthEastUS 06:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Look I totally agree that it is bad journalism to cut and paste a story. It would be much better if the story was re-written. I can't argue this. I made some changes to the release, but I did not completely rewrite it.

However, bad journalism is better than no journalism at all. Cut and paste news is better than no news. Others can add and rework the story once it is posted.

The release being posted on the website is irrelevant. It is still a release, and it still conforms to any standard of being open and public.

While it is not a good practice, is a common practice for traditional media reporters to publish press releases. It has been a common criticism of media coverage of the Iraq war that news outlets regularly published White House press releases verbatum.

Let me know if you find something that suggests otherwise.

SouthEastUS 07:05, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Charm City

Hey hon, just noticed you're a Balti-moron! Cool!! I stopped there for 20 years 'til I finally got moving along again, southward. From Virginny, a hi and a wave :)

P.S. no wonder you got a kick out of the 'Frankenfish' story. Edbrown05 21:05, 24 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hope you will help me if this happens

An anon put this on my talk page today; "== Warning == theres a plot to perman. ban you. see: [[2]]"

Neutralizer 20:35, 25 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Did you know about this?

That it is , apparantly, being drafted in your sandbox? It just doesn't seem to be your style and it would make me pretty sad if you are involved. But you don't have to answer if you prefer not to; I have no right to know I suppose. Neutralizer 20:55, 25 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thank you Chiacomo

Westcoaster is an indep. online news source, the only one for our area (Tofino, Ucluelet, Port Alberni - Vancouver Island, BC). We are just starting out. I don't know what a license compatible with CC-BY is and if you need me to put a disclaimer/statement of license for the story, just tell me what that looks like and I'm happy to do that. I chatted with a Craig this morning about posting up here, made a bit of work for him to delete a bunch that I posted, I'm so sorry to cause you folks work.

" The story you created on wikinews, Can the big M help save the West Coast fishery? Senator Mahovlich On Fisheries is a copyvio of a story found at The website doesn't appear to have a license compatible with CC-BY and the individual story has no disclaimer/statement of license for the story. I've not yet tagged the story as I wanted to communicate with you first. --Chiacomo (talk) 18:37, 29 October 2005 (UTC)"

Running List

Hi, they all seem to fit ok on my view; so I can't tell how it looks on your screen. On my screen there are now about 3 lines of links. That's great if you wish to add the titles. Thank you. Neutralizer 23:47, 3 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

War stats article

I moved your request to the article talk page.Neutralizer 04:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Blair denies Iraq pullout

Blair denies Iraq pullout, I see you protected this, can you add categories to it? It'll be unlocatable unless it has UK, Iraq, and Politics and conflicts. Brianmc 07:30, 4 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Nomination for Experimental Arbitration Committee

Hey Chiacomo, I've heard good things about you, so I have nominated you to be an arbiter on the Arbitration Committee. Before making up your mind, please familiarize yourself with how it will work, and feel free to improve on current methods. Once you have made up your mind, let me know on my talk page. Thank you, --MESSEDROCKER (talk) 04:39, 6 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Use of the byline template

Use of Template:Byline is generally reserved for OR articles (where the reporter is actually on site). Please see Wikinews:Style guide for more information. --Chiacomo (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Oh, thanks for that, Chiacomo. I just discovered the template yesterday, and assumed it was the new overall standard. -- user:zanimum

[[w:|]]== speed drumming and stefan khacheturian ==

Only World's Fastest Drummer Federation (WFD) can administer speed drumming records. Mr. Stefan Kacheturian's claims are open to intense debate and are being discredited by WFD. Even if his British records are legitemate, they are not as impressive as advertised. If ranked officially by WFD, his 1048 score would be no higher than 10th place,one notch behind 15 year old Matt Smith of Flint, Michigan's 1051.

Thank you so much

I really like it; but I worried it might be too wild...but I did it anyway....thanks for noticing Chiacomo. Neutralizer 05:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Running list; thanks for the heads up

will fix it. Neutralizer 00:57, 12 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Nigga revert

thanks for reverting

really are there any wiki articles on these vandal bots?--Whywhywhy 09:13, 12 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Removal of flag on my user space

c.c. Chiacomo and Amgine

  • MrMiscellanious; Perhaps you are unaware that Amgine and Chiacomo on IRC suggested the flag (link to a page on my user space) as an alternative to the link being a Water cooler topic as it was before. In fact, Chiacomo set up the page for me.
  • I do not feel it was appropriate for you to alter my edit on my user space at all; and especially with no discussions. I respectfully request an apology for your action in that regard. I will send a copy of this message to Amgine and Chiacomo so they can explain to you their reasoning for suggesting the flag and I ask you to voice any continued objections you have to them as it was their idea and they know more about the appropriateness of community flags than I do. In the meantime I will put the flag back on my user space. Neutralizer 13:42, 12 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Equality of restrictions

Chiacomo; I like this addition you made to the Administrators page;"Users currently involved in a dispute with an administrator should not request de-adminship" and I am wondering, since Amgine is updating the blocking policies now, whether it would be a good time to put in the reverse restriction; i.e. "Admins currently involved in a dispute with a user should not block that user". ?? Neutralizer 23:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

I just deleted something at the exact same time as you did

\I just deleted something at the exact same time as you did. Bawolff (-  23:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

minor edit

ok; thanks; I did put "background and expand but I guess I should not have clicked the "m" ? Neutralizer 21:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

editing comments

Sorry, I just often see where I could have said something better...but I think we should cool it and see if anyone else has an opinion about this? a cup of tea maybe ?Neutralizer 04:33, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

happy thanksgiving :)

Hi, Chiacomo, I am having such a hard time with the wikinews site; I keep getting disconnected during the preview portion and sometimes stuff gets saved that should not have been and then I can't get back in for 5 minutes. I keep getting kicked to "wikipedia foundation" page? I must remember to put in more edit descriptions. I have been trying to stay away from said articles but I think MrM is causing MUCH more trouble on such articles than me. What about asking him to refrain from such articles as well? and also, how about some blocking for the terrifically nasty personal comments he makes toward many editors(particularly me)'s very difficult to be the only one trying to avoid confrontation. If you read the suggestions of the mediator, I have done a good job of allowing the community to determine the destiny of articles...Amgine simply discounted the mediator's suggestions and MrM would not even go to mediation. I will work harder to stay away from those articles as I said I would but I expect you to put out the same corrective edits in the direction of MrM and Amgine as you do toward me...that is only fair,Chiacomo, don't you think? Also, Please advise; How do I archive discussion on my talk page?

Thanks for the continued support and have some turkey for me. Neutralizer 19:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Edit Count

Yup, I've passed 1K edits. :) I'll accept a nomination, but I suspect I'll get some opposition I wouldn't have gotten if I'd accepted earlier. Brian McNeil / talk 08:53, 25 November 2005 (UTC)Reply


Thanks buddy:)) Neutralizer 14:25, 25 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Image:Stanjan.png -- Fairuse

I don't believe the above image can be used under any of the fair use exceptions permitted on Wikinews. Before deleting, will you please include the URL of the page from which the image was retrieved on the image description page so we can check for sure. --Chiacomo (talk) 23:55, 1 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Oh, darn. Go to, then click "About the Bears" to find a small version of the pic. I don't know where this copy was from now, but I doctored it to not have a yellow glow around it. -- user:zanimum


I'd disagree. Viewing the site, the items seem to be in PR formatting, however the content is more comparable to a news source rather than a PR source. By that, of course, I mean, there's more news from them than Press Releases. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 18:27, 3 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks/Quick Question

Chiacomo--Thanks for the welcome, your name somehow reminds me of a race horse. On another note, (excuse me if this is already answered) when an article (like a breaking news story) is being edited by multiple people, does Wikinews somehow pull foward information as two or more people save a version of the article within seconds of each other? In other words, if someone saves a version, then 3 seconds later I save my version, does my version overwrite their version or does their info get included into my version somehow? Thank you, Srcrowl 05:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Chiacomo

I mostly make edits on Wikipedia, and didn't realize Wikinews didn't follow the same policy of marking Slashdotted pages as such. I apologize for any inconvenience I've caused you.


Thankyou for providing information on the dispute resolution process. I will be using it for my dispute with Amgine Cartman02au 01:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)Reply


Thanks for the tip... ya learn something new every day. - Borofkin 04:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)Reply


Hi. Does Wikinews usually do interviews? Would PGN, of, iirc, SRI, as mentioned in the first article of the Technology Brief for December 14, 2005 I wrote early this morning, be a good person to interview? Thanks, W:Unforgettableid 21:02, 14 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Re: User talk pages

I would agree with you if I felt the issue was only that deep. However, it seems as if no matter what I try to contact the user with, my comment ultimately gets deleted from his page and ignored. Obviously, I do not agree with the actions. But, I find the behavior to remove comments, especially when not vandalous, to be very disrespectful. Hence, the restoration. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 02:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Request for moderation

Seeing as you kindly pointed me towards the dispute resolution process I would be honoured if you would serve as moderator between Amgine and I.

The dispute page is at - Wikinews:Dispute_resolution/Users_Cartman02au_and_Amgine. Of course you are free to not accept my request. Please let me do so either way. Cartman02au 03:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Reply


Thanks for that link to the interview page. I have put PGN up for December 2005. --Unforgettableid 04:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Howdy

Yeah, doing quite well, physically. I really dislike school though. Way too much stress. (I mean, the learning part would be cool, if they didn't make it so sadistic).

Anyways, season's greetings to you Chiacomo!----RossKoepkeTalk 06:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Reply


I have to leave in not too many hours for a road trip. I've mentioned on the dispute resolution that I'd like to move on to the discussing-of-resolutions stage of things. Want to take a look? - Amgine | talk 21:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Reply


Noon my time, 1.5 hours... and so much to accomplish still! - Amgine | talk en.WN 18:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC)Reply


I dont really understand "confirmation votes in classes, much like Meta does?" Can you put in a link? International 01:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Now I see. Yes there are some intresting stuff wich some can be used. But I will not go in debate with you about this in watecooler exactly after your comment. Your use of word "rant " and "vitriol" is little countraproductiv if I read between your lines, am I right? As I ranted the discussion Is the best :) International 17:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)Reply
No, you are not rambling. The "discussionfirst" was my little complain in my comment. By just vote at the right place and keep the commenting under Comments this will work fine. International 00:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)Reply


The more of the world we can cover, the better off we are. I noticed that many of your artiles have a single source -- while there's nothing in policy requiring more than one source, in practice, we generally try to have at least two sources.

That's because there were not other sources available on those articles.

These are just a sampling of example articles. Generally, the publish date is the date that the
tag is added to the article. Our goal is to publish current news -- rather than dated text. 

I know, I think that is very bad policy, but I haven't done it since I learned about this policy. --MateoP 16:11, 21 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Today short infobox

Glad you like the infobox, it makes Wikinews navigable without reference to the "back" button. :) Yes, I'm probably going to keep sticking it on lots of articles. Brian McNeil / talk 20:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Penny drops So, you've got this automatically stuck on articles. I think that's a good thing, we should be concentrating on bringing people into the wiki* world and letting them see where it can go. I've put the full-length template on a couple of stories and left others alone because they had graphic content, but anything that keeps people looking at Wikimedia sites is good.

Sam Maestas, Community Activist

Sorry Chiacomo, but what do I need to do to solve this dispute and how do I make to necessary changes? How do I get this piece in the encyclopedia?

Burning building in Brasilia

I added the source... check it out. Sitenl 00:31, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

No policy?

You're kidding, right? Whenever users act such as Primetime and Gyre did, it's an attack. It's disruptive. A six-month block is acceptable in this case - forging votes and comments in order to disrupt the community and it's process. I'd like to hear why six months isn't acceptable in this case. Because for me, it's not even enough. These people were here for one reason: disrupt the RfdA by manipulating it. There is no good faith in their edits, and for you to assume one is present is troubling to me. --MrMiscellaniousHappy Hanukkah19:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

And I will be upholding the blocking policy, for it does state that users who "Are trouble-makers who are not contributing to our goals." do get blocked. Additionally, under the disruption part of the blocking policy - "Admins may, at their judgement, block IP addresses or usersnames that disrupt the normal functioning of Wikinews. Such disruption may include changing other users' signed comments or making deliberately misleading edits." The actions are fully within policy regulations. --MrMiscellaniousHappy Hanukkah19:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your help.

Thank you for your help on the OC Transpo article. I had some typos I was fixing and darn wiki edit conflict showed up... so that's why I got some what might look like seemingly revert edits. :s eik! Thank you again. (I guess I'll have to make a wikinews account) w:user:CyclePat -- 03:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

So how do we make it so when we do a search for OC Transpo or OCTranspo it shows up somewhere?

Thank you for the positive comment. I sent a link of this article to OC Transpo feedback. We'll see if they leave me any feedback of if they edit the article!! -- 03:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

StuRat's 3RR violation

I'm glad to see you didn't block StuRat for this, but can you offer an opinion on the article's talk page about inclusion of the country in this instance. At the time StuRat got into a dispute about the article it made no mention anywhere in the title or article of the location of the incident. MateoP's inclusion of Mexico in the article text at my suggestion seemed a little halfhearted and not really an answer to what was, I believe, a legitimate concern. Brian McNeil / talk 23:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. Also note that I did not revert to the same thing as before, but rather tried to take suggestions into account and modified the original title accordingly. Specifically, Brian McNeil told me using a slash in the title might cause a problem and MateoP objected to my removal of the name of the Mexican city from the title, so I took both suggestions into account and modified subsequent titles accordingly. Thus, I believe I have neither violated the spirit nor the letter of the 3 revert rule. MateoP, on the other hand, has reverted the title 3 times in 24 hours to exactly the same thing, and has ignored (and in fact attacked as "Eurocentric") both my comments on the deficiencies in the title as well as Brian McNeil's comments on the need to identify the country in question. Therefore, I would like to request that he be blocked, or at least warned, for this behaviour:

  • 20:30, 3 January 2006 MateoP m (Rape and murder suspects in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico arrested moved to Rape suspects in Ciudad Juárez arrested)
  • 19:52, 3 January 2006 MateoP m (Rape/murder suspects in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico arrested moved to Rape suspects in Ciudad Juárez arrested)
  • 18:50, 3 January 2006 MateoP m (Rape/murder suspects in Mexico arrested moved to Rape suspects in Ciudad Juárez arrested)

StuRat 23:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

StuRat tried to enforce his point of view 4 times. I have not blocked him and I won't unless something else happens. --Chiacomo (talk) 23:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Category: Published

After adding my last comment I noticed this page is marked as Published, shurely shome mishtake? Brian McNeil / talk 23:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC)Reply


no problem, but the "by Name" has got to go. Will leave it in your capable hands. - Amgine | talk en.WN 15:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Awwh, thanks!

Thank you very much for your award, Chiacomo! Unfortunately... it looks like a bleeding seal. No worries, it's still a great reward with plenty of meaning nonetheless. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 00:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Airstrike Article

Nope...if it was published, then they did it against my opinion DragonFire1024 is Jason Safoutin 19:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

a "hello" required?

user looks like[3] he intended to sign (and presumably sign-up), a hello boilerplate in order? Doldrums 07:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Rephrased my opposition

Hi,Thanks for the welcome back. I reflected on exactly why I feel you are not ready for this position and I am now sure I have expressed my feelings accurately. Not to open old wounds but you deserve to know that I am still very hurt and confused about what your involvement was in the offsite dossier that was used to try to kick me off the project. It just seems so weird that it would be your journowiki sandbox and your first edit and then all the rest were done by Amgine. The way it was done just seems so unfriendly and ambush like; I can still hardly believe you were involved at all in that method. [4] [5] [6] [7]

Having said that, I have no hard feelings at all; just a bit of hurt feelings and confusion on my part; but I do feel that the involvement by yourself in that episode (above) is incompatible with the level of transparancy and independence that would be hoped for among the Arbcom members. I hope you can understand what I am trying to say? Neutralizer 04:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your encouraging words; I am really trying to be useful; but it seems whatever little edit I try to make, I am facing accusations of "violation" and "disruption" from either MrM or Amgine. Would you please have a look at my edits hereon the article and talk page as well as MrM's comments toward me and please tell me what I did wrong and how I should respond to MrM? Neutralizer 05:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
Ok,that helps, please be a bit more specific about the timeline allowable for editing published articles (how long after publishing is it reasonable to make a correction/addition). Also, how should I respond to MrM's use of the "violation" word? Neutralizer 05:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
That is quite helpful.I'll have a go at it manana. Thanks:) Neutralizer 05:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
Return to the user page of "Chiacomo/Archive 2".