User talk:Leighblackall/2009

Welcome

UPDATED

Welcome to Wikinews

Getting started as a contributor How to write an article Pick something current? Use two independent sources? Read your sources before writing the story in your own words?. Do choose a unique title? before you start. 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. 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   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 Neutral point of view Cite sources Writing an article Content guide Style guide Reviewing articles

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 The Water Cooler The Latest News The Newsroom Articles for deletion Audio Wikinews Recent Changes

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.

• This welcome message would have probably been a lot more useful to you.

It would be useful if you can keep notes on the - er - "jarring" aspects of coming to Wikinews with a Wikipedia background. If you can see ways to improve the above-linked page for Wikipedians, please do suggest them. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 14:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Good suggestion Brian, will do so. And thanks for the invitation. Leighblackall (talk) 20:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

But, please, condense it as much as possible. Nearly 1kb to say "reviews will be hard, critical, and perhaps blunt" is a bit much. The issue is, once reviewed and published to some extent it's done; the article will be indexed by Google within 10-15 minutes and that is what people will be reading before someone can fix it. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 23:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Recuse yourself

Off-wiki you demonstrate a clear "climate change denier" POV. You have demonstrated it here. Any journalistic publication seeking to maintain its integrity would never have asked you to work on such a story, at least based on your October 3rd tweet, "Global Warmimg disproved: http: // bit.ly/bpisp". (http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/9/29/the-yamal-implosion.html - bitly is blocked by the spam filter).

Leave it. You're not going to get what you want published. You still assert the emails prove what you want to believe, and you've a bloody nerve calling Wikinews any sort of tabloid when that is, quite frankly, the only sort of place would publish your initial draft submitted for review.

I suggest asking ex-Australian Rupert Murdoch if you want a break in journalism. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 01:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

You're mistake here is spectacular Brian, and the issue is your own making. I have tried to remain polite and respectful to you, but your comments and remarks broke my patience and now I am on the offensive! This CRU story obviously a news worthy story, and I have done all I can to represent the story, including removing all possible bias in the text. Yes I have a Climate Change skeptical POV, who doesn't have a POV on things they read about! But the real issue here is whether I have done enough in the story meet the review standards, and whether Wikinews (you) are open to diverse reporting community. My POV, (if it is not evident in the story) should not matter! It would not matter if I had of edited by alias, you would be none-the-wiser!

The second issue for me is that I asked you respectfully to help improve the article so that it makes your review standards. I wanted to learn, and wanted the story to get published. You "humoured me" and persisted with public insinuations of my motives!

The third issue for me is that I put this story to Wikinews because I hoped the community would help deconstruct it! Who knows, my Climate Change POV might have changed!! Instead it has been confirmed and I even question your motives.

So, this news story has not gone out because of your POV about my motives, despite my repeated assurances of honest motive and evident willingness to address the precise problems you point out in your reviews. That along with your comments and innuendo is just flat out rude and unwelcoming to someone who might have become a prolific contributor on a great range of stories! I had/have a genuine interest in Wikis, have authored 3 books in Wikibooks 1. Permaculture Design 2. Sustainable Business 3. Anthropology of Animals. I'm a wikiversity custodian and authored the course Facilitating Online and many others, lead Otago Polytechnic into using Wikieducator for their open educational work, and about to help lead the University of Canberra to Wikiversity. It is a grave concern to me to encounter people like you who could effectively block these efforts when things don't go your way. I am familiar with Wiki etiquette and believe you have made a bad call here, owing me an apology, and either editing the story to meet standard, or publishing it because of its news worthiness. If your concern is that this story will attract an over whelming number of bias people, I can appreciate that - and will honestly do my bit to help maintain balance and objective reporting as best I can.

I'm about to write another story about the Crawford Report in Australia. It has nothing to do with climate. It is about sport. I have a POV about that too, but I will try to report it honestly and objectively. This point is I have an interest in contributing to Wikinews on any number of fronts! How unfortunate to encounter your bias and stubborn resistance that discourages my efforts considerably. Leighblackall (talk) 02:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Argh! Huge reply! And - my apologies - I didn't notice until way, way after the article went up and I'd criticised it getting a passing review. I would have rapped RockerBall over the knuckles for absolutely any author on that article, it was not directed at you. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 02:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok. All clear. I guess its too late to make the major edits you suggest... fyi, and no comment on your standards, but I'm getting good feedback on the article.. from Australians mind you.. so perhaps their local knowledge helps in understanding. My lesson for next time. Leighblackall (talk) 05:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Crawford report article

FYI, I failed Australian sport may be on the cusp of change due to style issues. Sources shouldn't be linked to in article text and the writing style was a bit choppy for a news article. Check my comments on the articles talk page--RockerballAustralia (talk) 07:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks RockerballAustralia, have replied more in the talk page of the article. Nice to see it got through - quite motivating :) Leighblackall (talk) 01:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

merge about CRU hacked emails

Please join the discussion here: Talk:British_Climatic_Research_Unit's_emails_hacked#Merge Gryllida (talk) 11:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Have done so Gryllida, thanks for the invite. Leighblackall (talk) 01:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The article has been published. Thank you for your collaboration! Gryllida (page, talk, contributions) 00:31, 25 November 2009 (UTC)