Meta Commons Wikipedia Wikiversity Wikibooks Wikisource Wikinews 
This is an English Wikinews user talk page, where you can leave messages for Green Giant.
This is not an article or an article talk page. If you find this page on any site other than English Wikinews, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware the page may be outdated and the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikinews. The original page is located at
  • Please sign and date your entries by clicking on the appropriate button or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
  • Put new text under old text.
  • Click here to start a new topic.
  • Be polite and friendly.
  • Assume good faith.
  • No personal attacks.


Why did you delete the article? If you revert your changes, I promise to work on it every day. Thanks. TheFurreterPress (talk) 04:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

It was stale. The event in question happened well over three days ago, and its overall relevance was, IMO, dubious from the start. Please refer to Wikinews:Newsworthiness for more. --Dylan Smithson (talk) 04:53, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
"With the exceptions noted, it's very rare for an article to be published more than three calendar days (in UTC, the time Wikinews keeps) after what the article is reporting." --Dylan Smithson (talk) 04:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
@TheFurreterPress: Don’t be too disheartened by the deletion. We have all had draft articles rejected and deleted for one reason or another. It is part of the learning process on Wikinews. As Dylan has noted, the article became stale from about March 10/11. There were no edits for about five days - which is why I tagged it as being possibly abandoned. Unless there is some more recent aspect of that story, it will not regain freshness. It is a long-held principle of Wikinews to only publish fresh news. There are exceptions such as interviews, which can extend the freshness timescale. Could you outline anything that could refresh the story? If there is a reasonable prospect of such freshness being extended, I’ll happily restore the article. --Green Giant (talk) 08:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Please sight these editsEdit

Hello, Green Giant. Can you please sight me edits on Kim Yo Jong criticizes US-South Korean military drills?
•–• 18:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Done. Green Giant (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Really appreciate it!
•–• 18:42, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Could you please sight the edits on European Medicines Agency calls AstraZeneca vaccine "safe and effective"? --JJLiu112 (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


Hi, Green Giant. I will be afk from Sunday morning 6AM IST to at least Tuesday morning 11 AM. I will have internet access, but won't be easy to use the mop and the bucket. And I also won't be able to review.
•–• 15:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Acagastya: No problem. I’ll try to be online during those times and keep an eye on things. -- Green Giant (talk) 18:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Green Giant, really appreciated. Gryllida (talk) 09:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


Hello! I unsubscribed everyone from 'welcome a bit', as I am not sure who is still interested. If you would like to continue receiving notifications, please visit Special:EmailUser/Gryllida and write "Re-subscribe for 'welcome a bit'" in the message body. Thanks!. -Gryllida (talk) 03:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Moving a published page?Edit

(Apologies if this comes out as a rant) What was the reason to move this page, Green Giant? The does not use English (US), nor did the author choose or request English (US) for the headline. If an article is published, we DO NOT move the page until after the article is archived unless it is one heck of a dying emergency. This creates multiple entries in the Facebook/twitter/RSS feed for those who are subscribed to our feed. Worse, the page was moved without leaving a redirect. Meaning anyone who saw the first post of this article was published will now end up on dead end. If you want a page to be moved post-archival, please put {{moveprotected}} on the article's talk, so one can do it later.
•–• 04:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately, it does come across as a bit of a rant. "The does not use English (US)" - I’m not sure what you are referring to but the article subject is definitely a US subject. Although I personally favour British spellings wherever possible, in this case the article name just does not look right. I would have expected it to be picked up during review. Having said this, I note we have an ambiguity in the guidelines at WN:Style guide#Spelling which allows geographical preference or author preference. However it also goes on to encourage using an obvious spelling where possible and in this instance that would be the US spelling. --Green Giant (talk) 09:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
There are two things to discuss here. Even if the article is related to the US, the author does not have to use English (US). The choice of English variant for the article is left for the author and the reviewer (who publishes the article) to decide. If the author did not use English (US), and the reviewer didn't convert it to English (US), it should not be renamed post-publication.
And in no circumstance must an admin rename a published article without leaving a redirect. If you see our Twitter account, the first version was tweeted out -- and when we rename without leaving a redirect, anyone checking that link will see the deleted page -- which should never happen. Always leave the redirect behind. However, if the published article is renamed before it was archived -- a duplicate entry is created. So please, do not do it. (That is the reason we protect the page so only admins can move it.) As long as there is nothing severely wrong with the headline, renaming should happen only after it is {{archive}}d by a reviewer.
•–• 11:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Clearly we are not going to agree on this issue. I understand what you are saying about moving but you appear to be glossing over the core issue. Either the author and reviewer genuinely did not realise that "criminalise” is not a US spelling or they don’t want to acknowledge it as a valid spelling. The average US reader is going to see a non-US title for a US subject. It may seem small but things like this mark Wikinews out as sloppy, which is the image our opponents want. It is similar to using "Bombay" for “Mumbai" and putting it down to personal preference. However long Bombay was used is less relevant than the local wish for it to be referred to as Mumbai. -Green Giant (talk) 12:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
The Twitter feed is indeed a separate issue. If two tweets have been sent, this is either a coding issue or a setting that can be fixed. If a Twitter user did come across the deleted page, they can see where it has been moved to and I don’t think they would struggle to find the article. --Green Giant (talk) 12:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

a broken link will look more sloppy than the spelling variant. It is not a coding issue -- when a page is added to CAT:Published and sighted, a tweet goes out. That is how it is supposed to be. The liberty to use any English variant is so one is not forced to stick to either one going against their preference. Wikinews is not US-only news, we are for global audience. That is why the SG is purposely loose, not to force non-US volunteers having to use the other variant, as that may discourage them from writing about it. Consider this: if we had to stick with English (US) for US articles, and a reviewer simply refuses to review it because they don't find English (US) sensible -- the project will suffer. And news sites for global audience don't abandon their variant. Both BBC and The Guardian stick with English (UK) spelling for US articles, while ABC (US) used English (US) for a UK article. If someone thinks we are sloppy for using one spelling over the other, they are just ignorant people, and we should not let our editorial process be governed by people who can't grasp we write for global audience.
•–• 13:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)