Feel free to leave me a message!


McCart42, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these!

Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews:

There are always things to do on Wikinews:

By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Davodd | Talk 23:56, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OK to summarize existing news?Edit

This is a bit more of a question about the overarching mission of wikinews than about simple etiquette. My goal so far when putting up requested articles has been to read, internalize the information, and summarize what I've learned, with a particular eye for facts that make the story extraordinary. This is mostly what every reporter does; however, since all of my sources (to this point, and for the foreseeable future) are secondary, I generally refrain from adding some of the more human-interest elements of a typical story, such as quotes and pictures. This, of course, is due to copyright - am I correct in assuming that these would be copyright violations?

And also, should I be looking to do more than just summarize? - McCart42 01:19, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It it imposible to copyright facts or incidents. This means if you paraphrase and cite sources, you are not violating copyright. For instance, let's say the Wall Street Journal' quoted Pres. Geroge W. Bush saying "America will destory all evil doers."
You may write:
  • "America will destroy all evil doers," Pres. Bush said in a Dec. 14 Wall Street Journal interview. (Or somethign similar if it was an exclusive interview with a WSJ reporter)
  • Pres. Bush told reporters that America will destroy all "evil doers." (Or something similar if you see the quote in more than one source and it came from a press conference)
  • "America will destroy all evil doers," Pres. Bush said. (If you see the quote in any official U.S. "dot gov" [i.e. www.whitehouse.gov] press release or other report - because it is public domain, you do not need to cite the source of the original quote in the text.)
Of course these are just three examples. Remember, copyrights only apply to the WAY information is written -- not the facts presented. If you re-arrange the facts in an original presentation so that your work does not look like a duplicate of the original and cite your sources, then copyright should never be a problem. -- Davodd | Talk 13:06, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

DPL on developingEdit

Hey McCart, could I ask you to share your thoughts on this here? Thanks Dan100 (Talk) 28 June 2005 23:49 (UTC)


The category sort, using the alternative text, should work. For example, if you add another with [[Category:2005-07-07 London bombings|2005-07-10]], it should appear in the list above the article with [[Category:2005-07-07 London bombings|2005-07-12]] and below the article with [[Category:2005-07-07 London bombings|2005-07-07]]. It only lists the "2" just like it only lists the "A" for articles beginning with that letter.

- Amgine/talk 03:36, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Wikinews link in current events templateEdit

I'm disappointed you decided to undermine my proposal. If you'd checked to see where the current template was being used, you'd actually have seen that Wikinews is already covering all the stories.

The little "Wikinews stories" boxes are useless - they're invariably buried at the bottom of pages. Even if anyone ever finds them, by that point they probably won't be bothered to click the link.

As I pointed out on the water cooler - the only reason why the London bombings article gained so much traffic from WP was because the link was (briefly) at the top of the article. Dan100 (Talk) 21:34, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Response (originally posted on Dan100's talk page, was deleted 2005-07-15 18:29:51)Edit

Wikinews link in current events template

I didn't mean to undermine your proposal, I just wanted to state my opinion. Of today's events in Current events, as of right now, only 5 of 10 of them have stories at Wikinews. In the Current events category, it's the same, from what I can tell. I do think that using the extra Wikinews link will draw people to contribute the article if it doesn't exist already, but the important thing is that it must add value to WP, not to WN; we're the ones changing their template, after all. And if only half of the WP articles marked with the Current template actually have information at WN, we will be forcing their readers to sift through our site for information that might not even be here. Eventually, I think the time will come that we will have a better ratio of current events covered, but let's wait until then to impose upon them to add WN links to the Current template. At that point I don't think they will be able to argue with us that nearly every current event they have is covered on WN, and the link will be useful to BOTH parties. - McCart42 (talk) 22:26, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the amendment. : )Edit

Kevin Baastalk 17:36, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Article namingEdit

Originally brought up at Future talk, though I wasn't at the discussion itself. I was wondering if there is any thought to changing the way articles are linked in case we find ourselves rehashing similar headlines. A good example is with sports stories. It's not inconceivable that Team A might win a match over Team B by the same score on some different date. Right now, I guess we'd just look up our thesaurus and find a synonym for "defeat" - which admittedly isn't that difficult. But it seems as though maybe articles should be linked to by a combination of their date and their title. That would eliminate any reasonable possibility of having two articles with the same name. Maybe I'm being naive about this and it isn't a big deal though. Has anyone thought about this (non)issue? - McCart42 (talk) 22:09, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Actually this was brought up un November, 2004.. And the consensus was - no one could agree, so we left it alone. -- Davodd | Talk 03:44, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Link? Or was this on IRC? - McCart42 (talk) 15:03, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
Link:Wikinews:Dateline Poll -- Davodd | Talk 00:14, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
Clarify - brought up in Nov - vote in Dec. -- Davodd | Talk 00:15, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Future talk 2Edit

Hello, I would like to invite you to attend our second future talk, it will be held on Monday, August 1 at 21:00 UTC. It will be held on the Wikinews IRC channel #wikinews For more information please see the page on meta The main topics will be audio Wikinews, WNN and portals/neighborhoods It would be great if you will be able to attend. --Cspurrier 15:42, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

User: Rcameronw has been blocked for requesting de-admin vote and alleged "trolling"Edit

Just wanted to let people know that, following yesterday's discussion, user rcameronw has been blocked for 24 hours. It was decided that rcameronw's request for a de-admin vote constituted "site disruption". (see article talk page for more info:[1]) - forgot to sign at 2005-10-10 07:07:15 (EDT)

Request to NeutralizerEdit

McCart42, I noticed your message to Neutralizer which invited him to submit work under your account during his time of ban [2]. Please do not interfere with the blocking policy on Wikinews. --Mrmiscellanious 20:41, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

your sigEdit

noticed your sig was messed up. you probaly already know about this, but anyway, here's how to fix it Wikipedia:Wikipedia:How to fix your signature. Bawolff ☺☻  23:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Cats for Basketball ArticleEdit

Hi McCart42, I appreciated that you added cats to the "Stanford women's basketball knocks three-time champion Connecticut out of NCAA tournament" story. That's the only way I found it. It would be easier to find this news if the cats "Women's basketball" or "Women's NCAA basketball" were added. It's protected and I can't do so myself. Deeb 23:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikimedia PennsylvaniaEdit

Hello there!

I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:

Thanks and I hope you sign up! Cbrown1023 talk 16:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Your account will be renamedEdit

23:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


06:34, 21 April 2015 (UTC)