ElizabethLittle
|
Welcome to Wikinews
|
Getting started as a contributor
|
|
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.  | |
|
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!
|
Hi. The article was reviewed as not-ready for publication. See review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 02:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Flavour Flav
editHi. You failed to address almost every point raised in the previous reviews. Until you do, the article has zero chance of getting published. Before you resubmit again, please create a checklist on the talk page, check off each point as you address them so YOU know you taken the step towards getting published and WE know you have done that. Only after YOU check off on the talk that you addressed all feedback should you resubmit. --LauraHale (talk) 05:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Please stop.
editPlease do not submit again until you do a checklist on the talk page where you review all the comments and indicate you worked towards addressing them. Failing to address them and resubmitting is considered disruptive. If you want to know if you fixed one thing, ask on the talk page instead of resubmitting. --LauraHale (talk) 05:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Your article
editI renamed your article to Iraq bombings kill 25 people. According to the style guide, headlines use the sentence case style of capitalization. —Mikemoral♪♫ 02:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your contribution
editHello. Your article "Iraq bombings kill 25 people" has been deemed abandoned, but is still viewable at User:ElizabethLittle/Iraq bombings kill 25 people. Thank you for your contribution. Remember that most articles from new contributors are not published and so there is no need to be discouraged. Just read Wikinews:Writing an article and follow the guidelines there and your next article will likely be published. Thanks again for your interest.--William S. Saturn (talk) 01:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Cranial implants developed from 3D images
editHi. I have left feedback for Cranial implants developed from 3D images at Talk:Cranial implants developed from 3D images. Please read this feedback, review the style guide and published articles, and fix everything mentioned plus other issues you identify after reading style guide and examples. With the huge amount of work because of the review queue length, unless everything is done and it looks published ready, getting a second review quickly will now likely happen and newsworthiness will come into play. --LauraHale (talk) 06:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Looking at articles from a reviewer perspective...
editWhen I was doing reviews this morning, I screencast a number of them with the hope student contributors and other Wikinews reporters could see what reviewers are looking at and better understand some of what we are looking at. Hopefully you may find these helpful for understanding what we look for, bearing in mind that every reviewer does look at things slightly differently and no two reviews are the same.--LauraHale (talk) 12:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Welsh Paralympian Chris Hallam dies
editI have reviewed Welsh Paralympian Chris Hallam dies and left feedback at Talk:Welsh Paralympian Chris Hallam dies. The facts around his death are not readily available, so the ones that are there and important, like where he was living when he died, need to be emphasized more. Words like pioneer need to be avoided unless there are facts that clearly support it, and the text does not. (He won 16 Paralympic medals and that is a huge accomplishment, yet the article does not reference that.) The article feels vague, and not clear. It almost feels like in order to avoid plagiarism, key and important adjectives towards understanding concepts are left out... which in effect makes it difficult to understand. --LauraHale (talk) 07:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
NSA says thousands of privacy violations were 'human error'
editI have reviewed NSA says thousands of privacy violations were 'human error' and left comments at Talk:NSA says thousands of privacy violations were 'human error'. Please address these concerns before resubmitting. --LauraHale (talk) 08:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Screencasts of some of today's reviews
editThe six videos are screencasts of reviews done today. As a whole, all the articles have improved tremendously from when they students first submitted. Now, they have infoboxes. They usually have a relevant picture, most of the time giving credit to the photographer. They more often than not have categories. The external links are not in the body. The sources are more consistently and better formatted. These little changes make a huge difference for motivation when reviewing because they show reviewers students are listening to feedback and attempting to get things published according to community standards.
That said, the current issues get to the more difficult spot of issues with making sure inverted pyramid style reporting is done, plagiarism and very close paragraphing need to be better avoided, facts need to match facts conveyed in sources, and relative dating needs to be better done. These are on one level the much harder part of doing good reporting on Wikinews. The screencasts of reviews included from the batch I reviewed this morning are more so you can see that what we are (I am) thinking when we are (I am) reviewing. This may not be educational in terms of teaching you how to report, but it might give you insight into what we are looking for. Hopefully that can be a little bit helpful in terms of understanding what we as a community on Wikinews are looking for in publishable works. --LauraHale (talk) 11:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Screencasts of some of today's reviews
editThe six videos are screencasts of reviews done today. As a whole, all the articles have improved tremendously from when they students first submitted. Now, they have infoboxes. They usually have a relevant picture, most of the time giving credit to the photographer. They more often than not have categories. The external links are not in the body. The sources are more consistently and better formatted. These little changes make a huge difference for motivation when reviewing because they show reviewers students are listening to feedback and attempting to get things published according to community standards.
That said, the current issues get to the more difficult spot of issues with making sure inverted pyramid style reporting is done, plagiarism and very close paragraphing need to be better avoided, facts need to match facts conveyed in sources, and relative dating needs to be better done. These are on one level the much harder part of doing good reporting on Wikinews. The screencasts of reviews included from the batch I reviewed this morning are more so you can see that what we are (I am) thinking when we are (I am) reviewing. This may not be educational in terms of teaching you how to report, but it might give you insight into what we are looking for. Hopefully that can be a little bit helpful in terms of understanding what we as a community on Wikinews are looking for in publishable works. --LauraHale (talk) 11:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
New lead under investigation in six-year-old Madeleine McCann case
editHi. Rather than not ready New lead under investigation in six-year-old Madeleine McCann case, I have moved it back to the draft stage to give reporters time to address the comments on the talk page as these will need to be handled before the article is ready for publication anyway. I would also suggest looking at the article's history to see what changes other community members have made. Looking at the individual edits should give you a better idea of what sort of things reviewers are looking for. --LauraHale (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Sydney Opera House celebrates its 40th birthday
edit{{subst:deleted-aband|Sydney Opera House celebrates its 40th birthday|userspace=yes}} —Mikemoral♪♫ 01:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)