User talk:Michael.C.Wright/Archive 1

-

User page deletion

I have requested my user page on Wikinews be deleted. I am not requesting my user account here be deleted. I'm hoping the verbiage on the banner is incorrect.

I have created a global user page with meta.[1] I would like to use the one profile for all wiki sister projects. An example is my profile on commons: User:Michael.C.Wright is actually the global user page transcluded to commons.

Thank you!

Michael.C.Wright (talk) 14:42, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, it is impossible for technical reasons to delete an account, even for stewards/global sysops, so at worst the request would just be declined. Heavy Water (talk) 14:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay. That sounds promising. If there are any questions about global accounts, here is the page on meta: Global user pages.

Thank you for the clarification.

Michael.C.Wright (talk) 14:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Awards

		The Order of the Humble Pencil For completing 5 edits.

		The Order of the Modest Pencil For getting your first article published!
		A very thoroughly researched one, too! And good to see you're looking through the archives-one can gain a lot of insight into the history, people, and rules of Wikinews by doing that. --Heavy Water (talk) 04:54, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Heavy Water for the awards! Michael.C.Wright (talk) 15:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Category

You can create a Wikinewsie category for yourself to keep track of your articles, if you want, by the way. Also you can add the correct one of these to your user page, if you want. It's just for fun, really. Heavy Water (talk) 16:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Will do. Michael.C.Wright (talk) 16:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Senate just voted for 2002 AUMF repeal

FYI. Heavy Water (talk) 17:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah. I planned on writing something today. Thanks. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:35, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

US appeals court upholds ruling lawyer for ex-President Trump must cooperate with federal investigation

This did go stale. I do want to say: please check the edit history and its "diffs" (click "prev" in the history) after each review (including on this article) to see what you can improve in the future. Addressing those things can significantly speed up review. There just wasn't the time to finish this. Reviewing often is, in my experience, actually much more labor-intensive than writing, which did surprise me. You write detailed articles with a lot of background, which I appreciate, and I don't intend to discourage that, but it is a fact they require more time to review (not necessarily a bad thing). Heavy Water (talk) 00:18, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Since it is stale and now needs Gatwicked, I don't plan on continuing work on that article unless another editor or reviewer see's benefit in me doing so. There will certainly be more news on that subject for us to cover in the future.

I do know my articles take more time to review and I am sympathetic to that fact. I actively seek recommendations from reviewers on ways to prepare an article for easier review. I've also proposed technical changes that I think will benefit both authors and reviewers here.

From my brief experience with Wikinews, the review process is one key hinderance to Wikinews being agile and able to produce timely, relevant articles. If we can figure out how to make that process easier and more efficient without reducing the thoroughness of the process, I believe we'd make progress.

Regarding the length of the articles I write; I read through the sources you linked at a recent discussion at the water cooler, specifically other comments at the Meta page Proposals for closing projects/Closure of English Wikinews. There are comments such as "...a lot of these are very short" and "...none of them has any real depth." I generally agree with those comments.

A short Wikinews article that is not original reporting is more than likely, mostly a paraphrase of existing news. In those cases, it provides little value to Wikinews readers above what they'd get from the original news source. The value I try to bring is providing deeper background and synthesis — synthesis of sources to provide a richer background, not in arriving at new or unique conclusions.

I'm not a journalist and won't be doing much, if any original reporting. Therefore, the value I can bring is mainly articles with more depth and cohesion between articles, i.e., tracking news developments regarding AUMFs over the course of multiple articles.

I know you aren't trying to discourage longer articles. I'm offering here a bit of explanation into motive, in hopes of furthering the discussion around improving the writing and reviewing process because I do see that as a core hurdle hindering the number and depth of articles, generally speaking.

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Specialty Coffee Expo

Did you ever end up getting to go to that? If you did and just haven't written it up yet, there's certainly still time per precedent for OR (and the rules are bent more often for OR than synthesis; looking back, the last OR pieces of comparable significance were from about 2014). BTW, I must have been pressed for time when I first saw what you wrote above. I just read it in full, and you clearly grok the problems we face, and offer good solutions. Heavy Water (talk) 21:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I did three on-camera interviews but two of the three were quite coffee-centric and I didn't think that was a good angle for a general audience at wikinews. I thought about doing spot interviews of random attendees but ended up prioritizing other networking while there. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:54, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

It's understandable to a general audience and interesting (in my view); not as niche as many of the articles in Category:Halloween (specifically, the Haunters Conventions). That could be a great article even with just minimal text introduction (depending on how much time you have to work on it). Heavy Water (talk) 15:51, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in here.

Just wanted to say that I would find such an article of interest. I am saying this as a reader of Wikinews who knows coffee tastes good and that's about all I know, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:20, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Documenting the event (assuming you have additional photographs) and interspersing it with bits and pieces from the interviews surely would be newsworthy WN:OR. The full videos of the interviews could then be linked (if uploaded to Commons) for those coffee aficionados who want to get in deep. Or it could be an article about Indonesia's efforts to gain market share in the US. (Guessing the Ted Fishcer interview would be less applicable for the latter option.). Cheers, SVTCobra 17:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I should have time on Friday to dive deeper into this. I'm pleasantly surprised by the interest! Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 12:43, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry guys. I just didn't have time to do the article any justice. I had other priorities that needed my attention. The good news is that if things pan out the way I hope they will, I will have an opportunity to do some original reporting on coffee production in Africa. Fingers crossed! Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:14, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Ah, OK. Well, Africa OR would be extra good, offer something the regular media usually does not (since they practically only cover Africa when something tragic or destabilizing happens). Heavy Water (talk) 15:10, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Coffee quote

Hi again, Michael.C.Wright/Archive 1 I found a coffee quote for you at wikiqote. I hope you like it:

Just the other day, I was in my neighborhood Starbucks, waiting for the post office to open. I was enjoying a chocolatey cafe mocha when it occurred to me that to drink a mocha is to gulp down the entire history of the New World. From the Spanish exportation of Aztec cacao, and the Dutch invention of the chemical process for making cocoa, on down to the capitalist empire of Hershey, PA, and the lifestyle marketing of Seattle's Starbucks, the modern mocha is a bittersweet concoction of imperialism, genocide, invention, and consumerism served with whipped cream on top. No wonder it costs so much. ~ q:Sarah Vowell

Ottawahitech (talk) 15:39, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Nice! Thanks for sharing. Wikiquote is a project I've been interested in contributing to, just never have.

One of the coffee quotes I've collected: "Good communication is as stimulating as black coffee, and just as hard." - Anne Spencer

And there's always the very quotable Dave Grohl: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=fhdCslFcKFU

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:22, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Advice on getting an article reviewed

Hi @Michael.C.Wright, I really appreciate your contributions here and I wanted to reach out to you for advice on how to get my first article reviewed. I originally wrote it as a prepared story two days in advance of an event on February 16-17, but then I was unable to get a complete review. I have WN:GATWICKed the article several times since then, but I fear this will be its last chance to get reviewed before it goes stale and gets deleted. I've reached out to five administrators and several other reviewers in the last three weeks but all have either said they are too busy to review it or not responded yet.

The article is here: Two world records fall at the World Athletics Indoor Championships. Understanding that you are not a reviewer, do you have any advice for me such as ideas to improve the article and bring it up to Wikinews standards, to make a future reviewer's workload easier and to increase the chances it will be published?

Thank you, --Habst (talk) 21:37, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm glad you're sticking with it and really trying to contribute.

Here are some quick tips—things to keep in mind that I've learned along the way (and don't always achieve myself). In some of the tips I provide specifics for you. Hopefully this helps!

• Longer articles with many sources take longer to review.
  • The review process here is pretty stringent and thorough. In my experience, the reviewers seem to read every sourced article.
  • Be sure to remove sources if facts you use are established in another of your sources (I make this mistake frequently)
  • Wikinews definitely benefits from longer, in-depth articles and I personally prefer to write longer articles with a lot of background. However, they are harder to get published. Pick your poison. ;)
• The title states the main point of the article. If your title mentions two broken world records, that's what the article should talk about; who, what, when, where, why, and how two world records were broken. This is the WN:5W&H
  • Based on your title and the lede, how does the last section of the article fit? If you could cut that entire last section and sources associated with it, that could help the reviewer.
  • Similarly with the second section. The second section doesn't mention Bol, Charlton, or the two broken world records.
• In longer, more complicated articles, I indicate to the reviewer my source for a given statement or paragraph. I do this using HTML comments. You can see it in pre-reviewed versions of some of my articles.[2] Look for text such as this: <!--Source: Everytown-->
  • That tells the reviewer that a specific fact or statement can be found in a specific article.
  • The reviewer removes them as they review the article so they aren't in published versions.
  • Not all reviewers see or use those comments.
• Be sure to structure your article according to WN:PYRAMID.
  • Readers get hooked by your title and are reeled in by your lede
  • Your lede should answer the 5w's and summarize the entire article (and should be able to stand alone)

I like the style in which you've written the article. I would recommend looking at past sports articles that have been published on Wikinews to see the format and style they followed. I'm not saying you should robotically follow them, but they will show you what is acceptable. I seem to recall I had an article with sections and the sections were removed as part of the review process...I'll look to see if I can find it.

For whatever reason, things are really quiet here right now. No new articles have been published since January 4th. I had an article go stale without review last month. I just posted another for review today and intentionally kept the article as short and to-the-point as possible in an attempt to make it as easy as possible to get something new posted. Maybe for your first article and given the quietness we're currently seeing, you cut down your article to the smallest size you can stomach so that you can go through the review process and experience it.

Based on the dates of the articles included by the {{athletics}} infobox, we could really use a sports writer!

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 23:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright, thank you so much for your detailed advice. I have changed the title and the lede keeping this in mind, so that the main point is communicated clearly and is reflected in the title and body. I'll work on adding the HTML-comment inline source attributions if anything isn't clear.

It seems like your new article (which I do appreciate) has just been taken out from under review today ― this is the same thing that happened to my article before it went stale, so I fear the same thing will happen to yours. I was wondering if, based on Asheiou's response to your question at Wikinews:Flagged revisions/Requests for permissions/Asheiou, could you please vote (not asking you to vote one particular way or another)? I think your input is important, because you are one of the two or three active community members who are writing articles this year (technically, there are zero members who have published articles since Jan 4) and the requester is uncomfortable with taking reviewer action without community consensus. Thank you, --Habst (talk) 16:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I do intend to vote but I would like to hear more from Asheiou as well as other editors. I find Bawolff's comments interesting and would like to hear more about that as well—specifically what a new version of the review process might look like.

I like that enWikinews has a stringent and thorough review process. I appreciate the feedback I've gotten from reviewers and feel the resultant, published articles are always better than what I posted for review. But the lack of reviewers to perform that process is effectively blocking new content. One quick and easy solution to that is to simply add more reviewers. And one unintended consequence of that may be reduced quality in the review process.

I am interested in hearing what other editors ask Asheiou and what her answers are. If no one else asks questions, I'll ask more. But right now I don't want to dominate the process by peppering her with my own questions.

Lastly, I've had four articles go stale so far. I've gatwicked a couple and let a couple more go unpublished. As frustrating as that is—to spend the time putting an article together only to have it not reviewed and be deleted—I don't want to rush the process simply to get one article reviewed. I'd like to explore a solution to the current log-jam that is least likely to cause new problems later. If that means another, complete overhaul of the review system, I'd like to hear ideas of what that looks like.

I don't think we're at a stage where we should improvise a solution (but I'm open to be proven otherwise). The way I see it, raw page-views of en.wikinews surprisingly aren't dropping.[3] That obviously won't last without new content. But I think we have some time yet to be intentional.

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:54, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi.

I started a new story hopefully I can get more information soon, thanks, also if you need anything don't hesitate to ask me, thanks!!! BigKrow (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

I posted on the Collab page of the new article. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 00:32, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! BigKrow (talk) 01:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Have a good night Michael. Talk soon. Thanks for the helping hands! BigKrow (talk) 01:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

PGP??

What is this PGP key business??--Bddpaux (talk) 18:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

PGP is encryption software.[4] Individuals can use my PGP key to encrypt messages to me. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 19:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

It can also be used to verify identity, sign messages, etc. Unfortunately, it isn't very user friendly, so it never got the broad acceptance it should have. I've used it in some form or fashion for almost 30 years. I used to carry a copy on a 3.5" floppy. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 21:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Article???

Palestinians article close to publish or review??? Thnx 64.39.81.54 (talk) 21:25, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Are you referring to the article titled "12 Palestinians, possibly more, drown trying to get aid parcels dropped into the sea?" If so, work is being done on it to get it ready for review. I'm not a reviewer, so I can only help get it ready prior to someone else reviewing it. You are also welcome to contribute to it. BigKrow started the article and is currently the main contributor. You might check in with him to see how you can work together. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 21:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

The IP is me Michael sorry for confusing BigKrow (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Ahhh. I thought the three question marks (???) looked familiar.

Whenever you feel it's ready for review, feel free to re-submit it. I just wanted to get some of the basic stuff ironed out before a reviewer maybe rejected it. The orange banner and [Not Ready] can be a de-motivator. ;) Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 23:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

In your opinion do you think it's ready? I'm not sure and I hope it doesn't go stale, lately my articles have been doing better. 64.39.81.54 (talk) 00:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I think it could be published as is. It exceeds the minimal amount of three sentences. If it were me, I'd expand it more. The CNN article presents three points of view that you could write about: Hamas would like the airdrops stopped, humanitarian bodies assert that Israel is using starvation as a weapon, and a US official says the amount of aid arriving by land is increasing. Both articles mention that the airdrops are located in a way that makes it more likely they'll land in the water.

This might be an odd way to look at it; but I'd personally expand the article at least enough so that the sections from "Have an opinion?" and lower all fall below the image on the left. That makes the article look better/fuller in my opinion.

The nonexistent category:Gaza should also either be created or removed from the article. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

FYI, there's already a Category:Gaza Strip. Heavy Water (talk) 14:57, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Copyrighted

I thought they looked suspicious just saying. BigKrow (talk) 01:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. They all look suspicious. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 01:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

If you don't like suspicious, revert to remove copyright violations by editing and not copy-pasting the news, but "Amber Alert cancelled after B.C. infant" and "Rare 4.8 earthquake hits New Jersey and New York" does not like the copyright violations on news, such as the websites that copy-pasted edits, is not suspicious but it's normal. Yay. 199.212.250.163 (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Michael

How's my article looking so far? Thanks. BigKrow (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright im going offline for now talk soon. BigKrow (talk) 20:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Which article? Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 18:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Bargi_plant_in_central_Italy_felt_with_explosion BigKrow (talk) 21:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Without digging too deeply into it, I can see there are two broken (red) links. There are line-breaks or carriage returns in the middle of the first and third sentences. Remember also to attribute all images using {{image}} and to describe the image with a full sentence, and mention it's a file image if it pre-dates the story. Those things should be corrected before a reviewer gets to it (to save their time).

If it were me, I'd also expand it with some background. Also, the article states "At least three people were killed and four other bodies are missing..." That implies we know four people are dead (four bodies), but we don't, as of today.[5] You could improve that sentence by saying: "At least three people were killed and four others are missing..." Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 23:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

New article

I submitted a new article. BigKrow (talk) 02:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I responded in the article talk page. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

When there's a long string of edits that need to be reverted

Like here, instead of reverting them one by one, you can go back to the diff immediately before the first edit, like Special:Diff/4776306, click the edit tab, and then save. That reverts everything afterwards and is a lot faster. Also, you can warn disruptive users if you want, but there's no requirement to on this project. Thanks for your work both on countervandalism and evaluating submissions, it is really helpful. Heavy Water (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I figured there had to be a better way of doing that. Thanks for the tip and the kind words. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

My word!

This is horribly past due!

This award is presented to new reporters who have started 10 or fewer news articles.

---Bddpaux (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! You know the interns routinely get pizza on Fridays, right? Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

And: if only for your perseverance, a Cool Cat award!

You deserve this!

You deserve this, you Cool Cat!

---Bddpaux (talk) 16:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey BigKrow

@BigKrow, I was going to leave this message on your talk page, but there's some wonkiness with it. Your talk page is being redirected to a template. Was that vandalism?

The message is this: you don't have to delete the whole article Clear message after bomb threats three Tucson, Arizona area schools if you want to continue working on it. Just remove or completely change the last sentence and move on. Mistakes happen.

Let me know if you need help fixing your talk page.

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 02:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright It still needs a lot of work but, I hopefully got rid of the Copyvios??? Thanks. BigKrow (talk) 02:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 02:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

IP harassment

I pinged @Bddpaux this needs to stop @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I think we should implement a long-term block on the entire IP range, as recommended here: [6] and less clearly here: [7]. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Check User please

2607:FEA8:1F1D:8400:FAF9:19F7:C1C3:D56 BigKrow (talk) 20:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

It's likely our friend from Canada. An admin needs to block a couple of IP ranges to help combat the disruption. We had a temporary block of the IPv6 range but it expired. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

My user talk page

It was vandalised and now has nothing there anyway you or others might be able to restore? Thanks much. @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 16:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

The vandalism is a rat's nest for sure. Was there more content that you are missing beyond the comments here: [8]? Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

That vandal account created that page and overrided my whole talk page, yes that is my entire history of my talk page, thank you for trying to help! @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 16:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

It might take an admin to delete your current talk page and then to move this version of your old talk page to your new/current talk page. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright thanks Michael. BigKrow (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Bddpaux We found BigKrow's old talk page along with history here: [9].

I am unable to move that page to make it the current User_talk:BigKrow because that page already exists. I think it will take an admin to delete the current talk page and rename this version to become the new/current User_talk:BigKrow.

I believe this may be how the talk page became a redirect in the first place. When you try to move a page, it gives this message: "Note that the page will not be moved if there is already a page at the new title, unless it is a redirect and has no past edit history." So I think someone was trying to fix it by making the talk page a redirect so they could then move it. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 17:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC); edited Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 17:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks everyone appreciate it. BigKrow (talk) 17:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I struck part of my earlier comment. The redirect was created with the first move/rename of the talk page. But then somehow a template was involved and a rat's nest ensued. If only the vandals would focus that energy into constructive editing. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 17:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I know, right, sigh.... BigKrow (talk) 17:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

• Posting to simply prevent auto-archive. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Pre-review

For the sake of chatter: I'm not opposed to that process. We could use a bit of streamlining in that regard. I look forward to seeing how it might play out over a year or so.--Bddpaux (talk) 01:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi.

Just saying hi, we haven't talked in awhile, hope you're well. @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 02:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Yes, I was AFK for a few days. We took a long weekend in the mountains for some R&R. Things weren't quiet around here I see, LOL. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright, Welcome back! BigKrow (talk) 16:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Mistakes

Hi, Michael @Michael.C.Wright, I messed up the Texas weather article by mistake, any help? Thanks. BigKrow (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Heavy Water BigKrow (talk) 17:36, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Boston Celtics defeat Dallas Mavericks

Hello, please review the article I wrote about the Celtics' win against the Mavs. Thanks. 173.76.102.69 (talk) 19:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Please note I am not a reviewer and can neither review nor publish articles. However, I may have time today to take a look at it and make some suggestions. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

pre-review

I give you all the credit in the world for working on it, Cheers!!! BigKrow (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, but it is a team sport. ツ Hopefully it develops into something helpful. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 17:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good, but I also wanted to thank you for your work on your testing pre-review! @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 17:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

OMG CAT TITS account

Is that name appropriate for wikinews? Thanks just curious sounds like a possibility of a bad editor. BigKrow (talk) 16:31, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright, this one too Manifestation of the Witch's Titty BigKrow (talk) 16:33, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

OMG CAT TITS (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

If you find it offensive, I recommend raising the issue at WN:AAA, where administrators (or possibly global stewards) can review it in accordance with our username policy (WN:U). If you do post to WN:AAA, it is always helpful to use the {{user2}} template, which links to the user page, talk page, contribs page, etc. It's what I used just above.

Alternatively, you could also address your concerns directly with the user on their talk page. I agree that the username is not indicative of someone who intends to contribute constructively to the project, and it may indeed be a violation of our policy. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:04, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Same with Manifestation of the Witch's Titty (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I don't see how that username indicates someone who is serious about writing news articles and I can see how it could be offensive to some. –Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Pings inter wiki

I think they work. I just pinged you on another wiki, did you get it?

Needed to type your name manually, just "@Michael.C." offered no results there (it does show your account name here for that). Gryllida (talk) 10:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

It worked, but maybe because you posted on my user-talk page there, whereas when I tried it from a regular page, the other user didn't seem to get pinged. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida, interwiki pings do work (but I think the user might need to have an account on that wiki). Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

interesting , important condition Gryllida (talk) 11:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Continuing discussion from your reviewer request...

It's getting off topic so Ill reply here... Mainly the fact that I've essentially been here for under 4 months, and I only have 11-12 published articles (much lower than virtually any reviewer). Also, I haven't done or pre-reviewed any OR, and there was a pre-review where I didn't really know the policy on something. Yes, I would like to become a reviewer, but do you (or anyone else) think that I am ready for it? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I think you would learn it quickly and if there were an active reviewer willing and able to mentor you, it could work. You also figure out the mechanics of Mediawiki quickly (i.e., how to update the Main page, templates, etc). You are persistent and can be dogged with certain things. One of the things I learned from my block at WP is that some people don't take doggedness too well, justifiably or not. If your goal is to collaborate more and work towards consensus more, consider trying to figure out how to adjust that doggedness or more importantly how it's presented so that it is more-often perceived as collaborative rather than combative. I have to work very hard on that myself. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 17:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I see that we have now arrived at the point in every discussion about improving Wikinews, the "this could work if there were active reviewers". Hopefully you being a reviewer can help with that. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 18:34, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

http://quassel-irc.org

Do you have a list of your published articles somewhere? @Me Da Wikipedian

Thanks Gryllida (talk) 10:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida nah, just check the 20 most recent published articles, the majority are mine... Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 00:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Google reports thirteen percent increase in greenhouse gas emissions

Hi, I am going through Newsroom deleting stale articles. I just found the one linked in section heading. I enjoyed the read and it looks like an important topic that is not immediately stale if they're still having that increased energy usage. Would you be interested in interviewing Google and several major giants (Microsoft, Facebook/Meta, OpenAI) about this, for example, by video call or email?

If so, the first step would be to add a note on article that it is being worked on to do interview, and make a list of questions on the talk page. Gryllida (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

This...

...was human error, I was aiming for the 'thank' link but the mouse slipped. Thought I'd let you know. Thanks for the tag. Gryllida (talk) 19:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Ahh, no worries. Thanks for letting me know! —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 12:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Special:Diff/4796888

Could this be also marked as abandoned? It was not edited for many days before. (Perhaps the 'stale' template could automatically change itself to Abandoned if no edits were made for N days. I haven't explored how this could work from technical perspective, yet.) Gryllida (talk) 23:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes.

Perhaps the 'stale' template could automatically change itself to Abandoned if no edits were made for N days. The CategoryTests extension[10] might be useful in that situation, but it isn't installed. I have tried to use it with a Pre-review category to automate certain maintenance functions around that template.

I'm not sure how to accurately test for the duration an article has been in a given category. Perhaps DPL could be used if we had a more robust version of DPL. But also, I believe Mediawiki is replacing DPL eventually. It has caused problems when used heavily by a project, specifically ru.WN on their main page.

Anyway if we can figure out how to automatically change categories based on duration in one or another given category, we could use the function in {{copyvio}} as well, to mark violations with speedy delete after 48 hours of being in Category:Copyright violations. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations on the successful request for Reviewer permissions

Hi Michael.C.Wright

Congratulations on the successful request for Reviewer permissions. You are now able to formally review and publish articles. After the review you will be presented with a step to add the new published article to home page.

There are several places where you can ask a question:

• This talk page is likely being watched by several contributors involved in discussions at the request.
• Article talk page, if related to article and contributors are being helpful.
• Wikinews:Water cooler/assistance can be used to discuss concerns worth keeping, in case they apply to more than one article. (Other sections of water cooler exist for policy, technical, proposals, and miscellaneous issues.)
• Administrator noticeboard (AAA) in case sysop action like a block or a page deletion is required.
• Live chat for real time discussions, with '#wikinews-en' for English Wikinews, and '#wikinews' for international-related or translations-related discussions that may require attention from other language editions, and '#wikinews-tech' for technical discussions.

Please let me know if you need help at any point.

Again, welcome to reviewing; thanks for volunteering, and have a great day!

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 00:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I look forward to working with you. I know I can rely on you for advice and mentorship. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Re: the helicopter story

I have just replied to you at the article talk page. (Please advise whether you want to continue getting such notes on your personal talk page, or you already receive Notifications through the wiki.) Thanks and best regards, Gryllida (talk) 10:11, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I have my preferences set up so that any page I edit gets added to my watchlist automagically. I also keep an eye on the recent changes special page. With our low volume of edits, that combination keeps me pretty much up-to-date.

Pings and/or heads-up are always welcome on my talk page, as long as the necessary discussion remains as centralized as possible. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

scoop access

Hi, congratulations on receiving the reviewer bits! As I understand, now as a reviewer, you should be granted the scoop access. Would you be able to hop in on IRC some time, so I can talk to you about it and grant you the access, so you can proceed with reviewing ORs? •–• 16:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I am on it now (nick: MichaelCWright) and just sent a message to you there. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I got an important work in between and I had to leave, so I could not detail everything. However, I will use the EmailUser feature to send you information later today. Once I get the acknowledgement on that, I shall create the email. By the way, do you use any email client on your computer?
•–• 02:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I am fine with just using webmail to check Scoop, I won't need to configure any email app for that, if that is what you are asking. I will likely configure my Scoop account to forward emails to my personal account, if that is possible. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:27, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I have not received anything via EmailUser. Did you send it? I have alternative contact info on my userpage. Thank you, Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikibreak (over)

I'll be offline for up to the next seven days and won't be checking in during that time. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Are you still there by any chance? The helicopter story looks ready, and freshness is about to expire now. Gryllida (talk) 23:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright pinged. Please respond. BigKrow (talk) 23:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

BigKrow & Gryllida, sorry I missed your requests! As soon as I signed off here, I hit the road for a long-planned backpacking trip. I am back now. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:27, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Welcome back. Wow, that sounds good. I hope you enjoyed the trip.

In the newsroom there is a story which I edited, about the exploded pagers, which I cannot review.

Could you please skim all stories in review queue and pick something that looks relatively easy to publish? I keep finding something to pick on and not publishing anything. Gryllida (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations

Didn't get a chance to congratulate you before you left. Not sure there was really a consensus there (only one reviewer weighed in) but fine. We all know what happened last time; and I don't want to create the impression I'm trying to stir up drama by doing this repeatedly. I may not have opposed, actually (wow, what a vote of confidence). I just wanted to say, of any of the regulars who weren't reviewers, I'd have trusted you to handle the job best because of your knowledge of your own limited knowledge (of course, there's what you do know, too) — and I can see you demonstrating that already. Did I mention WN:Tips on reviewing articles at some point? Really, really helpful. I use the checklist every time (you mentioned you developed your own checklist based on a 2010 discussion, but this one's been kept up to date and it's just detailed enough). Heavy Water (talk) 05:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:41, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau survives a no confidence vote

Thanks for reviewing the article. The article on the main page where there is a photo, still has Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau passes confidence vote title. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I got this fixed. It could have been that I chose the wrong article from the widget/gadget that helps update the lead articles on the main page after one published an article. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

California ied article

Getting close to staleness if not already hoping u can review it again? Thanks. @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 14:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

For some reason I missed this message, I do apologize.

I would have published it per my pre-review, but @Bddpaux still has it under review. It has now gone stale and will need to be Gatwicked and re-reviewed to be published.

In hindsight, I'm not sure my plan as a new reviewer to pre-review articles that have time before going stale was a good idea. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Vote about license upgrade

Hi!

You have now added a conclusion ("Yes, WN upgrade to CC-BY-4.0 if the the other WN also upgrade."). Thank you for that! And I agree that it seems to be a fair description of what concensus is.

But I think we need to clarify what that means. We know that some versions of wikinews want to change too. None that I know of had said no. But many have not made a formal vote and given a clear yes or no. So can we say that the other WN will also upgrade so therefore the final result is a Yes, English Wikinews upgrade to CC-BY-4.0? Or do we have to wait for the final result from all the wikis or from a RFC on meta?

As I understand it some wikis wait for the result from English Wikinews before they do anything. So it is a very slow process to get anywhere.

Also if we agree that it is a yes then we need to know which date the upgrade will take place. I think it would be good if we could send a message to all WN with something like this:

"English Wikinews will change to CC-BY-4.0 with effect for all edits made from December 1, 2024 (or another date). Arabic Wikinews have allready changed, German, Polish, Chinese and Esperanto Wikinews have also decided to change or support to change. You can read about it at en:Wikinews:Water cooler/policy#Update of license.

We hope that you will also change license so we can continue to share articles across the different versions of Wikinews.

To complete the change we need to file a request on Phabricator. To make it easier we plan to make one request for all the versions of Wikinews that will change the license.

To be able to coordinate the change of license we will therefore start a vote here suggesting that you also update the license to CC-BY-4.0. The vote will end on November 15, 2024. That will give some days to prepare the update.

If your wiki have allready decided or have an existing vote please leave a message here with a link to the vote/result.

Please note that if there are no comments or protests it will be taken as a support for the change per m:Requesting wiki configuration changes.

We will appriciate any help to make sure this vote is announced the correct places and the text is translated with a translator so if there are any errors please help correct it. If the local policy have different rules than the one we suggest please correct as soon as possible.

Vote

The vote end on November 15, 2024. All users with more than 250 good edits can vote.

Question: Do you support to upgrade to CC-BY-4.0 too on the same date as English Wikinews upgrade their license?"

So perhaps we need a new section where you add the final conclusion (English Wikinews will update per <date> and we will send out a message to all versions of Wikinews to try to get everyone else to update too) and perhaps also a section where we can keep track of the progress (and can discuss the wording of the message to other wikis). Maybe we can use the page I created: User:MGA73/Licenseupgrade. If you think we can move it to a new name so its not in my namespace (Wikinews:Water cooler/policy/License_update_2024 for example). MGA73 (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

That's a lot to unpack. ツ I'll try to go point-by point:

• So can we say that the other WN will also upgrade so therefore the final result is a Yes, English Wikinews upgrade to CC-BY-4.0? Or do we have to wait for the final result from all the wikis or from a RFC on meta? Would it be better to say something along the lines of 'English Wikinews will upgrade on date X. Other Wikinews projects are managing their processes internally and independent of English Wikinews.' I think waiting for all other language projects to align and work through things would be time-consuming and detrimental to maintaining momentum for the ones who want to move forward. And I would hope that a change in share-ability (due to license incompatibility) might spur action. I think it's best to post this conclusion after en.WN has all pages prepped (edit-protected pages are all that we think are left). Once that is done we could come up with a date and post the message to all language projects.

• Related; To complete the change we need to file a request on Phabricator. To make it easier we plan to make one request for all the versions of Wikinews that will change the license. Should we instead provide each language project with instructions on how to do so? That way we all aren't held up and can instead each work at the pace our projects can support.

• As I understand it some wikis wait for the result from English Wikinews before they do anything. So it is a very slow process to get anywhere. Agreed. I think the only thing holding en.WN up is the edit-protected pages and Gryllida has committed to making those changes over the next few days. 🤞

• Please note that if there are no comments or protests it will be taken as a support for the change per m:Requesting wiki configuration changes. My reading of the linked document is that it does not state an absence of comments or protests are interpreted as a vote of Support. I understand it to instead be summarized as 'you had your chance.' "[I]t should be enough to show that you have tried to gain consensus, and that you have given an opportunity for objections." It might be a difference without a distinction, but for such a formal and impacting procedure, it may be worth sticking very closely to what the Meta page stipulates. Maybe the verbiage could be along the lines of

"A lack of opposition or absence of comments during the polling period is not automatically considered support. Rather, it reflects that participants had their opportunity to express their views. If no objections are raised, the poll will default to a 'proceed' action, assuming no opposition was voiced."

• If you think we can move it to a new name so its not in my namespace... I agree and I am unsure of where that should be moved to. Since it's in your user space, it will be cleanest if you or an admin move it.

Thanks for sticking with and managing this! —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Lol yes it was a lot. Sorry about that. But I think we have to figure these things out.

The reason I suggest that we coordinate the change of license is because then it can happen on the same day and as you can see on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/source/mediawiki-config/browse/master/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php$10882 all wikinews have the same license per default. If the wikis change separately then some dev (or whoever make the changes) have to edit several times and add each wiki separately. So my plan and hope is that we can get all or most to change. If lets say 3 wikis do not want us to change then we can say on phabricator that "Please change the default license for wikinews to cc-by-4.0 but make exceptions for these tree wikinews: Foo1, Foo2 and Foo3 (they stay with cc-by-2.5 unless they decide otherwise later).".

I agree that it is perhaps a bit too much to say that no comments = support. I just wanted the wikis to know that the change will also happen if there are no protests. So that if they ignore this vote the license will change.

So perhaps the conclusion can be as you suggested but with a little addition:

'English Wikinews will upgrade on date X. Other Wikinews projects are formally managing their processes internally and independent of English Wikinews however the magical M@M duo will try to coordinate a joined change of license on all Wikinews projects at the same date.'

And if we want to do it like that then we need to chose a date that is minimum 1 month away. If we do that then Gryllida have plenty of time to fix the pages while we set up the messages/votes on all the other versions of Wikinews.

But of course we can also do as as you suggest and change license on English Wikinews and write to all the other versions of Wikinews that English Wikinews have changed and then still try to make all the other change license too. --MGA73 (talk) 21:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Please review now

Hi Michael.C.Wright

I've written these two news articles:

• New Zealand Navy ship HMNZS Manawanui capsizes one nautical mile from shore (event October 9 Saturday)
• Rio Negro tributary of the Amazon River experiences lowest water level on record (event this Friday)

Please, review them now. I purposedfully wrote them short and as few sources as possible.

If something is not verifiable, please take it out or leave a note.

Many thanks.

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 04:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Edit: the second story was published by RockerballAustralia (thanks!). The first one is still in queue. Gryllida (talk) 07:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Queue: *3* in total: Monday (1), Tuesday (2). It is currently *Wednesday*. One breaking story (hurricane). 🥺🥺🥺 Gryllida (talk) 09:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I will have less time to dedicate to reviewing this month. I will also have at least two, maybe more periods of no access. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Notes about reviewing

Hi @Michael.C.Wright

I am very happy to see you around helping with the reviews following your successful application for Reviewer. I believe you are very good at wikification (a point I am not doing well) and at reading the sources to verify the information. This is very good. For future I would suggest to increase your "sense of urgency" by pinging the article authors on the article talk page to attract their attention. This is probably something that the software should do automatically. I will inquire at the technical water cooler about this shortly.

I am wondering what other reviewers would suggest to you (@Heavy Water? @Acagastya? @Bddpaux? Last 3 active reviewers I believe) for feedback.

Have a good day. Gryllida (talk) 07:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for posting this. Hopefully others will respond.

I can work at creating more of a sense of urgency. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes please update leads

Hi Michael.C.Wright

When I am editing from mobile or among noisy environment I don't touch the leads -- easy to mess up. Please continue to update it when you have a moment. There was no decision against it. I will try to do it also as often as I can.

Thank you. :-)

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 22:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Will do... —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Corrections

Hi. You probably saw the debacle with the pager explosions story that warranted a correction. I found one of the problems there — inaccuracy in dates — to also be present in the article on Ryan Routh's superseding indictment. In both cases, it seems likely you missed converting relative to cardinal dates. So please be more careful about this immediately pre-publication in the future. Both were also missing some important cats; the Tips on reviewing articles checklist prompts the reviewer on this. If you add a cat for a country, you have to add the relevant news region cat(s) as well; so Category:Hungary needs to be accompanied by Category:Europe.

I have a habit of writing headlines that are too long, but if I were you, I would've added altered the headline to something a bit more unique (e.g. "golf course attempted assassination"). Heavy Water (talk) 23:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I will pay closer attention to date conversions. I should have caught that.

That's one aspect that the pre-review process can't include so I'm unfortunately not in the habit of checking it. This is a good reason to have an active and seasoned reviewer on hand to address these things either before hand or within the 24-hour grace period immediately afterwords—so corrections aren't necessary. I'm not saying it was anyone else's fault, just that it would help new reviewers if we had some sort of a transition/training period for them.

Regarding the requirement for two geographical categories, I don't see that in Wikinews:Tips on reviewing articles or Wikinews:Reviewing articles. Tips says "At least one geographical category..." Am I missing something?

Also, how do you update the five lead templates? Do you normally do it manually—one at a time—or is there a widget/gadget/javascript page you use to move them?

Thanks as always for the help. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

"it would help new reviewers if we had some sort of a transition/training period for them": Yeah, absolutely. I think it could've helped me a lot when I was new too. In the past, experienced reviewers would meet on IRC once or twice with a reviewer candidate or prospective candidate to co-review an article, perhaps with the newbie demonstrating how they would review the article, making edits on-wiki; the experienced reviewer could offer corrections and evaluate their readiness.

That minimum requirement is accurate, although I can't think of a situation where a country cat wouldn't be needed. All I'm saying is when you do use a cat on an article, its parent cats need to be used as well.

Oh, yeah, Wikinews:Make lead is the JS tool. I tend to use it except when I need to use the edit summary to explain the rationale for my editing or switching around leads others put on the Main Page. Heavy Water (talk) 21:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Headline verb tense tip

Hi Michael C. Wright

Tip: news headlines are in present tense.

E.g. Bruce Lehrmann judge said to have no links to published book of judgement

FYI. I don't think any action or correction is required on this page (unless it's less than 24 hours and you dig up a policy that allows change).

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 05:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I wanted to change the headline because Lehrmann is not the main focus and using his name to identify the judge could be misleading/confusing. I didn't, but I should have.

It's been over 24 hours since it was published, so we're stuck with it, unfortunately. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

resubmitted

I've resubmitted story about Qantas for your review. Gryllida (talk) 21:24, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Can you review

Can you review my UK Tory leader page? CSM.in (talk) 14:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

I may not have time today to review any articles but I'll see what I can do. Fingers crossed. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:11, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Israel confirms death of Hamas leader in Gaza

Israel confirms death of Hamas leader in Gaza it's not that it was abandoned, I did make the corresponding improvements but you wanted it to be eliminated and that's it, but I'm telling you something that you would love. HERE I WILL NOT CREATE ANYTHING AGAIN? thank you. Pitille02 (talk) 05:25, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort you put into the article and the improvements you made. My feedback was intended to help bring it up to en.Wikinews standards, which can be challenging, especially on a first attempt. Thank you for your contributions. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:00, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

live chat

Hi,

I would like to provide you with access to my w:Quassel Core so that you can access IRC continuously. You will need to install a 'Quassel Client' (no Core) from the http://www.quassel-irc.org web site. When this is done, and when you connect to IRC next time, please send me a private message to nick 'gry' while logged in; I will provide you the login details.

I consider this relatively urgent as new articles may die when people work on them asynchronously.

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 02:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Correction: the url is w:Quassel IRC. Gryllida (talk) 02:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I routinely remain logged into IRC and there is rarely any chatter in #wikinews-en or #wikinews. I don't think access (or lack thereof) to IRC is what is holding us back. I really do think we need more active reviewers and likely an updated review process that is quicker and easier for both authors and reviewers. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Next step

Hi! I may be a bit slow here so sorry to bother you again. What is the plan related to license upgrade? I think we need to know what needs to be done, when and by who. Can you help me out here? MGA73 (talk) 14:36, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I've been thinking about setting up a dedicated project page so we can track everything in a central location. We currently have conversations and lists scattered around and it makes it difficult to track.

We'll also need to request outside help with the admin work that needs to happen, as we don't have enough active admins here to get it done. We can't upgrade en.WN's license without an admin due to edit-protected pages.

I'll create the project page sometime this week and try to consolidate and organize all the info. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Sounds good. You are welcome to move my page or copy if you can use it. Perhaps we should just request a change at phab and when it is done we can ask global sysops at meta to change the relevant pages. Usually they respond within a few minutes. Once license is changed we can inform other languages and hopefully they will change too. --MGA73 (talk) 15:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

what admin work do you need done? Gryllida (talk) 00:13, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida: The request made here[11]. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

As I understand it some of the changes need to say something like that content is 4.0 except content from before <date> that is 2.5. It will be hard to make those changes unless we know which date the change will happen? --MGA73 (talk) 14:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I started a new section at Wikinews_talk:Copyright#To_do_per_November_2024. Feel free to update and/or move somewhere else. --MGA73 (talk) 15:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

lost it, archived discussion means no further work needed? can you open new inquiries to admins at AAA before asking global sysops Thanks Gryllida (talk) 04:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

If the archival you are asking about is the list originally at WN:Copyright, I archived that version yesterday. As the archive reason states, it has been moved to: Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade#pages-table (the project page). The table is collapsed by default, you will need to click the "expand" link to see the full table. The work is still needed.

I have previously made the following requests for this work, to include at WN:AAA: [12], [13], [14], [15]

In addition to the above requests, I have also made edit-protected requests on several (but not all) of the talk pages where changes are needed: [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22]. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:31, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

side note and a few questions

There is a "ignore groundless accusations" principle of journalists. May apply to that recent discussion with Ssr.

I am still awaiting your message on irc and staying on for a few hours to setup you with a quassel irc account.

You have a message in scoop with interview content. Did you rrceive it?

Are you using a linux OS on the device you are reading emails from?

Thanks. Gryllida (talk) 21:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Please also note I have an open request for interfaceadmin permissions. May be worth a vote as then I can start editing several wiki tools which are programmed in js in the mediawiki namespace and potentially a guided tour. Gryllida (talk) 21:23, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a "ignore groundless accusations" principle of journalists. May apply to that recent discussion with Ssr. I am genuinely curious what they see as the cause of the problem. I am also, as I said there, generally in agreement that en.WN is stale and abandoned and will remain so if we don't change something. So I don't see it as a groundless accusation.

I am still awaiting your message on irc and staying on for a few hours to setup you with a quassel irc account. I already have an IRC client and routinely connect and idle in #wikinews-en and #wikinews. I do not see IRC as a solution to any of the challenges we face here at en.WN at the moment.

For example, I sent you a direct message there three days ago about the email you sent to Scoop. Remember, I can't reply to old or send new emails from Scoop. I also responded on the article talk page about the interview with Nikolai. I'll need to verify the interview was indeed with Nikolai. Furthermore, if I expand the article with the interview myself, I'll no longer be 'uninvolved' and can no longer review it. I'm okay with that, it just means one of the other reviewers will have to review it and Heavy Water has already said it wasn't newsworthy from the beginning. So that will essentially leave RockerballAustralia to do the review.

So in the case of that article, we've used en.WN talk pages, Scoop, and IRC to try to coordinate the publishing of the article and we're still not successful. I don't think the solution is another app. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Ssr's point is "Wikinews is dead and always will be". That comes without any attempt to solve the situation and with ignoring recent progress (or attempts at such).

I am seeing recent reviews with "that sentence is misworded or not attributed" comments from reviewer. Then the article dies. Yes, that is a problem. Pinging me on irc and asking me to fix it can solve this.

I couldn't reply to you three days ago on irc because your nick was offline. I would be happy to reply if I could. Could you not close your irc client? Timezones are a possible problem here, but really the main problem is motivation. If we wanted to chat on irc daily we would schedule a time. Gryllida (talk) 18:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I believe we want the same thing; articles more easily reviewed and more quickly and efficiently published.

I just don't see IRC as a viable solution to that problem. If you saw my message on IRC three days ago, then you knew three days ago that 1. I can't respond via Scoop (a problem you've been working on since I've had the Scoop account) 2. That there are more details on the appropriate talk page and 3. from that, what needed changed in order for me to review the article. Your being able to respond to me via IRC was not an impediment to you moving forward with the article. Besides, you and I seem to be the only two who use IRC to the extent that we do. How do you see IRC helping with new authors getting articles published when the articles aren't in compliance with our policies and guidelines (PaG) and they aren't already IRC users and frequent participants at #wikinews-en? Is it faster and more efficient to first coach them through IRC usage then coach them through en.WN PaG?

Besides, any conversation we have on IRC is disconnected from Wikinews and not kept as an historical record should an article get published. I think IRC should be used sparingly for real-time coordination when it's needed, not as an 'always on,' frequently-used method of communication for en.WN issues.

I share your sentiment regarding Ssr's complaint in that it so far lacks any attempt at identifying the source of the problem—which is why I asked them for their opinion. I also feel they are accurate in their evaluation of en.WN's lack of both relevancy and future prospects of improvement. You and I have spent more time futzing about IRC and Scoop than working to figure out if the review process itself is a problem that can be improved or otherwise fixed. The copyright license upgrade project has been going on for over a year and we still can't get edit-protected pages changed in a timely manner. We are struggling to keep the lights on. Ssr was largely correct. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 18:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

wmflegal

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_talk:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade#Set_date_of_actual_upgrade_(a_poll)

what happened with wmf legal reply for it, did they reply or not

do you need sitenotice revised or did someone already do it.thanks Gryllida (talk) 04:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

The latest is at the link you provided. I have not heard back from them. However, we can now demonstrate to Phabricator that we did our due diligence and reached out for feedback. Hopefully since several other Wikimedia projects have already upgraded to 4.0 it will be seen as straightforward and non-contentious. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

clarity

"We have organized the project here: Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade. In addition to the mass deletion request above, we have a long-standing request for admin asstance listed here: Wikinews:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade#Pages_to_update_when_license_is_updated_from_2.5_to_4.0."

This is confusing.

1. organised project here 2. in addition to mass deletion request above [this is about sxw files or what was their name] 3. we have request for assistance in same page as link 1

Just sharing with you that it takes my time to understand what you mean. It would be simpler to write "The required admin actions are listed at Wikinews:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade#Pages_to_update_when_license_is_updated_from_2.5_to_4.0 (here); please also see the mass deletion request above".

Hope it helps. Maybe I missed something, if so, happy to learn of it.

Have a good day and thank you. Gryllida (talk) 18:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)