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) 04:23, 2 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I tried to write up a helpful set of review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 02:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Another set of review comments, now. The most effective way to get things through, of course, is to have already learned the lessons that are typically learned by one's first effort with an article (sometimes, first several efforts; but, I'm optimistic :-); once a writer has the hang of it, articles become likely to pass on their first review, and it's all much easier.

Interesting story, btw. --Pi zero (talk) 20:56, 21 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Published. Congrats! --Pi zero (talk) 03:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hope I didn't trip you up with the rename/edit. It's an important point to keep in mind, though; whereas Wikipedian neutrality aspires to reflect what a consensus of community members think is current prevailing view (I could be blunter, there), Wikinews neutrality aspires to not take sides. Amongst terminology consequences are that we don't call the US "America", and we don't call anyone a "terrorist" (that is, we don't with our own voice — we can report objectively that someone else used those terms; we don't make the judgement call ourselves, instead seeking to objectively provide facts so the reader can make informed decisions for themselves). --Pi zero (talk) 11:54, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

(Fwiw, things are getting hectic for me irl as the holidays approach, but I mean to try really hard to fit in a review-sized block of Wikinews time later today. :-) --Pi zero (talk) 16:23, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
Published. See review comments, detailed history of edits during review. (I deduce I was pretty tired by the time I finished the other review, or I'd have linked to the edit history there, too.) --Pi zero (talk) 23:27, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Change in article Lead 2

edit

Hello there! I just wanted to say though 6 members of NATO died, we can't change the flag. The news event took place in Afghanistan, the focal point is Afghanistan. Not in the States. And I don't think that and reviewer will agree to approve this change. And tribute...Won't that act violate NPOV?
117.198.182.221 (talk) 08:03, 24 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

I was torn between either the US or the NATO. The Afghan flag is simple at default. However, the victims were Americans. Of course, Afghans and other Americans were injured. Victims are detailed. Of course, we are concerned about Main Page general readers. I shall let the reviewer decide. --George Ho (talk) 08:16, 24 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
Reviewer didn't think so, so let's disregard your claims then. --George Ho (talk) 00:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
NATO flag would be good too. --Pi zero (talk) 01:13, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
That'd be nice also. However, the deceased are just Americans. I picked US flag for more emphasis and to attract more. I was thinking of using pics of soldiers in Afghanistan, but any of them is misleading. --George Ho (talk) 01:26, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Rats.

I really tried to get to this yesterday, but didn't get a chance to do a review until this morning (just now; it's mid-morning where I am). It hadn't registered on me, until I actually sat down to review it, that when submitted it was already on its last legs re freshness. --Pi zero (talk) 15:13, 25 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

No FOP in UAE

edit

Hello! Just wanted to know about your edit on Fire breaks out at Dubai, United Arab Emirates hotel on New Year's Eve removing the photo.
14.139.242.195 (talk) 09:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

In some countries, if you just go outdoors and take a picture, you don't necessarily own the copyright: no freedom of panorama (FOP). That image, which was sitting placidly on Commons for two and a half years, is now up for deletion on grounds that UAE doesn't have FOP so it's not a suitably free image — not the first time Commons has waited years until Wikinews is committed to an image and cannot remove it from an article before deleting it.

Most such images can be uploaded to Wikinews under our fair use policy, if we catch them before they're actually deleted from Commons, with the important exception that we cannot claim fair use for images under copyright by other news orgs. --Pi zero (talk) 11:53, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Okay. By the way CAT:Juventus F.C. has the logo missing. Should we now migrate each image we will be using locally?
14.139.242.195 (talk) 13:09, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
How to handle our relationship with Commons has been a topic of discussion as long as I've been here, and likely long before. Most recently, just a few days ago at Wikinews talk:Archive conventions. I do think we should migrate the image that's about to be deleted from Commons. (I'm clumsy with this stuff, myself; I've never really gotten involved with it, except for being aware of some of the theory, as for practical purposes all my Wikinews time has always been swallowed up by review plus tool development.) --Pi zero (talk) 13:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Reverted your change on File:Address Downtown Dubai.jpg because, in this case, resolution isn't really relevant. That only comes into play where, like Wikipedia, we're using a non-free image with a Fair Use/Fair Dealing rationale on, say, an album cover or somesuch. The other common case where we'd be looking for a lower-resolution copy would be things like a non-free photo of a politician. It's another area where we've crossed swords with Commons; too often we've had over-zealous Commoners demanding we delete images of people used under a FU rationale to replace with a free image now available on Commons. What gets forgotten is there's a date on our articles, so using a picture several years newer than an article just looks wrong. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Knock, knock.

edit
 
A team barnstar for you! Ten articles have been published already this week, including yours! Cheers.
Agastya Chandrakant ⚽️ 🏆 🎾 🎬 🎤 📰 10:59, 19 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikinews:Archives

edit

Btw, in response to a suggestion from BRS some time back, I'm working on a major upgrade to our archives splash page, using dialog; I've been using it, to a significant extent, as a test case with which to learn techniques for using the dialog tools. --Pi zero (talk) 01:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Fwiw: User:Pi zero/Archives. --Pi zero (talk) 02:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

publish tag

edit

Just a note. If you're going to tamper with the {{publish}} tag, do it in a single edit: don't remove it in one edit and then put it in its new place in a separate edit. --Pi zero (talk) 23:29, 2 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

James Bond star Roger Moore, 89, dies

edit

Hi. We need to be very careful about distance-from-source; review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 11:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Lead Templates

edit

The most recently published article need not to be the Lead 1 article. And I think OR should be kept on the higher level.
acagastya 08:50, 4 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

I'll respect your decision. Continuing at Talk:Main Page#Selecting stories as leads (June 2017) then. --George Ho (talk) 08:55, 4 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Could not review that one on time. I am sorry for that. But, I read that India and China have stepped up. You could write about it, and in the bottom section, as a background information, you could highlight the important points from this event.
acagastya 05:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi

edit

Sorry, is it too wrong Jeffrey Tate dies aged 74 so nobody publish it yet or have I to wait more days for it? Regards!!Esteban (talk) 22:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Esteban. You can wait for a reviewer. However, the story would become too old if reviewed too late. However, sometimes something so old would become so newer if updated. Currently, I'm updating "US President Donald Trump announces withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change", and you can help me on that. For Tate's death, I hope it doesn't become too old. Otherwise, it won't be published. --George Ho (talk) 22:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely nothing, though it could be put up for deletion without opposition. - Amgine | t 00:27, 13 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

I doubt it shall, and would not speculate as to how it might be. - Amgine | t 00:59, 13 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

McDonald's and Olympics ends their contract prematurely

edit

Just in case you want something to write, this might interest you.
acagastya 20:25, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, but I don't want to rush writing too many articles at the moment. I want to feel less stressful, and there are several other articles awaiting review. Would you please review a couple of them. Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 20:29, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
I would. After a couple of hours, I guess. I need a break too. Sometimes I feel like not writing more due to the review queue, sometimes I pick up a story and just write about it. I am in mood to produce more output at the moment. That reminds me, I need to write about the Confederation Cup! Well, if you have some energy left to write, or even start an article, and that interests you, "just do it". It's "all in or nothing". :-P
acagastya 20:35, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
;) --George Ho (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

refmt dates

edit

diff prev}}}


did you intend to shift all dates relatively to Sep 13? If you did, then why didn’t you use text search for “today” and “yesterday”? The article isn’t any bit better after you. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

That depends on when an article will be reviewed and then published, Incnis Mrsi. Also, I used the calendar to determine the dates, and usually a reviewer shifts dates while reviewing articles. You can read Wikinews:Reviewing and Wikinews:Newsworthiness (essay). --George Ho (talk) 08:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
I would also recommend WN:PILLARS, if one is trying to understand the project. Although, ultimately, I'm not sure quite what Incnis Mrsi most needs to realize about en.wn; this project is a tool, it can be a powerful and valuable tool, but one has to learn what it can do and how to wield it effectively. --Pi zero (talk) 12:25, 13 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Ireland to hold abortion referendum weeks before pope's visit

edit

Thought this might interest you (CC @Darkfrog24:). Any plans to write about it?
acagastya PING ME! 19:05, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

I wish I can, acagastya. However, I have activities and others hobbies to do in real life, making me too busy to write latest news. Also, my mom is not well, so I have to keep an eye on her briefly. Also, six articles are pending reviews, yet I wonder whether any of the six can be published. --George Ho (talk) 19:26, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
I can not review five out of those six. If I write -- I will be disqualifying myself.
acagastya PING ME! 19:31, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Do not despair, Acagastya. Like George Ho I am busy today but soon I will write something that you will love to hate reviewing. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:47, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Waiting for it.
acagastya PING ME! 19:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Re: the image licensing

edit

I did not understand why you wanted to upload small size images; or how reducing the image size would help in that case. The reason why those photos were not uploaded on Commons was because Commons does allow a non-commercial or an non-derivative work. But the actual reason is: when I am photographing someone, I would ask for their consent to be photographed. Consent of being photographed does not allow the photographer to upload the photos. (Now that depends on the judiciary of that territory, what they define in right to privacy. However, per the journalistic ethics, I am supposed to tell them their photo would be used on Wikinews articles. So I did. Asked for the permission to every single one of them. And I had asked only for Wikinews and not other site. Privacy and journalistic ethics when taken together, I would try to be more restrictive in the licensing to permit only Wikinews use (if possible, a non-transferable* ownership to Wikinews; not even the parent organisation) Long story short; no I am not granting anyone permission to upload them in a BY or BY-SA. Currently I am worried that ND work is permitted and it could be used as it is, on, let’s say a porn site and if the one whose photo was used comes to know about it; well what would they think of, as I had asked permission for Wikinews work yet it was used somewhere else.
•–• 03:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Not even a picture without an identifiable person, like File:2018 Karnataka Bandh 4.JPG? Anyway, don't worry; I won't pursue further (indefinitely) as I re-realized (or probably forgot) per c:COM:PEOPLE#Country specific that impermissible commercial use of such photograph is disallowed. --George Ho (talk) 04:52, 1 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Did not want to split the images in Commons and in Wikinews. Best if everything was at one place. And especially when a lot had people’s photo in it. By the way, what you are referring to in com:people is, as far as I can tell, for a public place and not a place where you need to pay for entering. ComicCon venue had banners which read Cosplay is not consent to be photographed. Also the right to privacy is being discussed in the Supreme Court of India; best to stick to journalistic ethics.
•–• 05:04, 1 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Chinese lawmaker votes for abolishing presidential term

edit

Can you please write about it? (CC@SVTCobra:)?
103.254.128.130 (talk) 08:06, 11 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Changing images

edit

Can I ask why you are changing images from the official portraits to something else? --SVTCobra 19:48, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

If you do not respond in short order, I am going to revert the changes. In my opinion, the changes are inconsistent and do not add any improvement to the articles. --SVTCobra 20:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
I thought that the replacements do suit the content well more than official portraits and that the replacements represent the title more accurately. However, I'll not oppose the revert if you wish to do so. --George Ho (talk) 20:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
OK, thanks. I will revert because this is very much an administrative action and not about a speech or event they attended. Cheers, --SVTCobra 20:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Edited -- rearranged paragraphs, removed passive voice, added information about the boy being transported to hospital after the rescue -- and submitted for review. --Gryllida (talk) 00:21, 4 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I also added some more info for better flow (or more epilogue). --George Ho (talk) 05:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi. There's some more cleanup needed — was glad to see the refresh, as I'd love to see us publish this, but, the review didn't go off without a hitch. Review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 02:36, 8 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, sorry, I got distracted by Meta issues. Congratulations on the article being published! Green Giant (talk) 00:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Leads

edit

Hi. Two suggestions, re changing the leads on the main page. In no particular order. I'd actually kind of recommend leaving it to reviewers; in this case, BRS notoriously doesn't touch the leads, but pinging me would likely work... eventually (e.g., I was afk for much of the past couple of hours or so). But, if you do choose to mess with the leads, I strongly recommend using Wikinews:Make lead, which takes care of some (alas, not quite all) the details. In this case, for instance, we do not put links of any kind in the text of leads, and makelead would take care of that. --Pi zero (talk) 00:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Blanking lead 1

edit

I appreciate the awkwardness of noticing something was significantly wrong, and trying to figure out what to do about it. I've been there, and sometimes chose better than other times... And thank you for stepping in to try to address the situation. I'd rather we didn't blank a lead; in this case —in retrospect, because, as I say, I'm very much aware how hard it can be to figure out something to do on-the-spot— a pretty good stop-gap measure would have been to revert the last edit to Lead 5, since that was the second copy of the COVID-19 article. That would hold the situation until you or someone else could sort out what had gone wrong and straighten it out. (The problem here actually was that I'd put the new article in Lead 2 when I meant to put it in Lead 1; but it could be something of a mess for someone else to reconstruct that.) --Pi zero (talk) 01:11, 21 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

New drafts

edit

Hi George Ho

I'm not sure if I already shared this with you previously, but there is a tool now, called 'User:Gryllida/welcome a bit', that allows to receive notifications about newly created drafts. It tracks additions to such categories as 'Review', 'Develop', and 'Published'. Notifications can be made on-wiki (this requires you to clean it up by removing old entries) or by email (via Special:EmailUser). Is that something you would be interested in signing up for? If so, would the current feature set suffice, or would you prefer to use another venue for delivering these notifications? The reason why I am suggesting this is because I am hoping that notifications like this, of new 'Developing' category submissions especially, may improve feedback to new authors. Thank you in advance for your consideration and feedback.

Regards, --Gryllida (talk) 06:46, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi

edit

Many thanks for helping with original reporting this year. Happy New Year. --Gryllida (talk) 20:49, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Support....

edit

I would appreciate a vote of support here: https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Requests_for_permissions/CheckUser/Bddpaux --Bddpaux (talk) 15:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Bddpaux: I'm a bit concerned with this - that sounds like canvassing which is not generally appreciated on Wikimedia. Leaderboard (talk) 15:41, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
You want to know what else isn't appreciated? 25 votes required for a project held up by a tube of glue and 3 sheets of tissue paper. I am trying to HELP our project, which is PRECISELY all I have done for 16 years here. In those 16 years, I've never read a word about 'canvassing'. That user is somewhat involved in keeping things tidied up around these parts... that was my motivation for contacting them. Nothing else.--Bddpaux (talk) 17:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Bddpaux: no matter how difficult the process may seem (in fact I had to struggle for months when I attempted to get CU at Wikibooks, which ended up being unsuccessful out of frustration), there are some conventions you need to follow. A key rule is not asking people "please support me" - people have been significantly penalised over this in some other cases such as steward elections (and the stewards may well decide to ignore such votes in your case). It's OK to say "reminder to vote for me" though. Leaderboard (talk) 17:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ok. You had mentioned (in some previous post) about streamlining that here (or something) -- and you referenced CU at Wikibooks. Maybe changing our policy or something.....? You know what I'm talking about?? I get that CU is serious and that is fine. But: 25??--Bddpaux (talk) 17:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Bddpaux: yes, that's been the rule ever since the CU policy was introduced - designed to weed out smaller wikis that don't have the membership required to justify a pair of CheckUser. The same policy applies for aspiring oversighters BTW. The only exception is: wikis with an ArbCom that are able to appoint CU/OS users. Leaderboard (talk) 18:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Leaderboard: Um... there's no local rule about canvassing in Wikinews, unfortunately. WN:Canvassing doesn't exist yet. Neither does m:Canvassing. I insist you please not try to apply Wikipedia's rules here per WN:NOT. Thank you. George Ho (talk) 18:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hi it's not a "Wikipedia rule" (and actually I don't know what Wikipedia rules are on this) - I've seen this applied globally (for example when stewards evaluate user votes before giving permissions). I'll admit I don't know why Meta:Canvassing doesn't exist - @Ajraddatz: am I missing something? Is this something that stewards normally tolerate for CheckUser? Leaderboard (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hmm.. good question! I imagine this would be subject to some discussion among us. If it's canvassing enwikinews users to comment on a local discussion, it's probably fine. If it's encouraging external users to come and support I expect we would take issue. The 25 support rule exists to ensure that local projects have a significant enough community to warrant having local checkusers - namely the ability to provide sufficient oversight of the activity of the CheckUsers (not through looking at the logs, but through being able to see blocks made, etc.) It is also aimed at limiting access to projects with significant sock problems (with community size being used as a rough proxy for likelihood of having long-term bad actors around), to avoid giving advanced privacy-invasive technical access to too great a number of people. We would ultimately look to enforce both the letter and the intent of the global policy, even though it may seem unfair to some. Ajraddatz (talk) 18:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Generally speaking, canvassing is not really a "rule" or "policy", per se, but it's usually frowned upon regardless since the consequences of canvassing apply on any project. I'm neutral about the discussion in question, however (would rather abstain since I'm not hugely active in this community). --SHB2000 (talk) 00:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pot stirring

edit
Well, there's no local rules about civility, yet I find the collapsed post distasteful. --George Ho (talk) 03:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Its been quite the ride the last few days. I certainly haven’t been angelic — far from it, actually. I have given a lot to this project. My “finer” self hasn’t exactly been out in front over the past 48 hours… that’s for sure. But: You are a ‘’’TRUE’’’ piece of work. Not long ago, after presumably sorting through a STACK OF NEEDLES, offer some bizarre critique about some words I didn’t even write (from last July, no less). You did have the decency to catch and strike through your error after another user straightened you out. However, you then PING’d other users TO RECONSIDER THEIR VOTED ON MY RfP for ‘Crat. You are a derisive force at this project. You hardly exist here and when you do show up, all you do is wonder aloud about peoples’ privs here but offer hardly a syllable of encouragement in any direction. My efforts to encourage (however awkward they might be) get called “begging” by you. I have spent 90 seconds checking out the YOU on other projects and I think this is a hobby of yours. It has to be. Maybe if you could stop shaking your pom poms for my destruction, this might heal itself. I do not lie down, while people like you walk 6 miles down the road to demean my good name —- and I have a good name here. How about you give your grubby little fingers a break for the next 30 days around here and go pour your misery elsewhere? Bddpaux (talk) 03:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes, you most certainly have not been "angelic" in the past few days. Certainly not your "finer self". George Ho absolutely, clearly, did the correct thing, something that I would have done (and probably @Cromium: as well) had they not. Did you ever consider that this is exactly why this is the only RFP I have ever seen where every support voter needed to be pinging to reconsider? It's you. As previously mentioned to you, inactivity is not a crime. People are not required to encourage personal attacks, nor should they be. They, are, a good-faith editor and the vast majority of the time helpful. Yes, if you beg for votes, people will call you out. In general, surprisingly enough, people call you out on your own bad behaviour. No one is trying to destroy you, you destroyed yourself. As a user who trusted you a lot beforehand, you ruined your own good name. No one is walking anywhere, for gods sake were online. Let's recall that this was all started by you being upset that you thought Cromium was driving @Asheiou: away. Guess what actually drove them away (temporarily)? The fighting you caused. And now you are trying to drive this contributor away. Do you want to help or not?
P.S. If I find you make another one of these notes on my or anyone else's talk page I will escalate. If you were a new user, you would have been blocked by now.Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 10:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I find it ironic that Bddpaux considers George Ho pinging supporters to reconsider their votes harmful to the project, when a few days ago he himself left messages on people's talk pages asking them to support the request. Granted, Bddpaux has acknowledged (I think) he was wrong to do so, but still. Heavy Water (talk) 21:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)Reply