I watch talk pages where I have recently left messages. Please reply in the same section to make discussion easier to follow.
If you leave a message on this page, I'll reply to it here.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead (attributed)

2008 2010
      Jan May 2011
Jun Dec 2011
Jan Jun 2012
Jul Dec 2012
Jan Jul 2013
Aug Nov 2013
Dec  2013 Aug 2014
Sep  2014 Jun 2015
Jul Oct 2015
Nov  2015 Jul 2016
Aug  2016 Feb 2017
Mar Aug 2017
Sep  2017 10 Jan 2018
11  Jan  2018 May 2018
Jun  2018 Apr 2019
May Dec 2019
Jan 2020

Some barnstars for youEdit

Thank you tirelessly working on the Taliban category which would have been so tedious!

I had been keeping a track of the barnstars to award you, but I think I need to stop postponing that.
•–• 19:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou. --Pi zero (talk) 20:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
And one more, for managing to review gigantic campaign trails!
•–• 23:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Just a thing I tried todayEdit

This cow urine article was difficult to write. I hope it was not that hard to review. After I saved the page, I decided to do a sanitary check (like how we do after review, pre-publish). I recalled this[1] study which claimed harder to read fonts made it easier to retain for the reader. I right-clicked on the article text, in Inspect element, for .mw-body-content p CSS, I added: font-family: Operator (A font that I have). You can use something like font-family: cursive instead. I don't know if that is something you would find useful or not, but I would be trying that for a few days to see if it makes any difference or not.
•–• 20:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

[1]: Elisabeth Donahue. "Font focus: Making ideas harder to read may make them easier to retain" — Princeton University, October 28, 2010

COVID-19 categoryEdit

Hi Pi zero,

I was surprised to see my recent edit rejected with no explanation. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 23:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech: Hi. You updated the wikidata link to a category page which acts as an internal wikimedia tracking page. Our categories (Example: CAT:India matches with most of the India pages on sisters) are named for the semantic reason.
•–• 23:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Heads up on my next articleEdit

Later today (UTC afternoon/evening) I'm going to write a recap of Tuesday 3/17 in the US election. A lot happened: Ohio's primary was delayed, Biden won the other three, and Trump became the presumptive nominee (i.e. got the delegates needed). Just wanted to leave a note. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 05:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


Hello. Is there any local policy for removing inactive sysops? There are currently 3 admins (Skenmy (t · c · b), Cspurrier (t · c · b) & Brian (t · c · b)) who have been inactive for more than 2 years. Minorax (talk) 14:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

We do have a privilege-expiry policy. It does not require us to remove such rights, but does allows us to do so. We often choose to wait longer than the minimal time before removing such privileges. --Pi zero (talk) 15:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Changing the title of an articleEdit

How do you change the title of an article? If I can’t, then I would like you to change the title of my article Tom Hanks and his wife catch coronavirus to Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson catch coronavirus and released after five days in the hospital ICameHereForNews (talk) 06:35, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@ICameHereForNews: If you view the article page in a web browser, while you are logged in, across the top of the page display there should be a line of control tabs. Way over on the right-hand end of that is a drop-down menu. "Rename" should be the one item on that menu; that's what you want to do. --Pi zero (talk) 14:18, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Does it have to be done on Desktop? ICameHereForNews (talk) 21:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@ICameHereForNews: I don't actually know. The mobile view looks to me as if it should work there too, but I don't actually have a mobile device through which to view it. --Pi zero (talk) 21:14, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I want to.......Edit

....email you something (trying to bestow a bit of privacy pertaining to a source), and for the life of me: I can't remember how to find/send to your preferred email address?-- Bddpaux (talk) 20:18, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bddpaux: I'll send you an email through the wiki platform; that should show you my email address (I think). --Pi zero (talk) 20:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
OK, take a look. I have to run across town to my office and anticipate submitting article for review within the next 4 hours. A smidge later than I'd intended but I feel like it is an important article, showing some stuff an American went through before the Coronavirus bomb really dropped across the globe. I need to add a bit more of her Coronavirus self-monitoring stuff (she reports she was only ordered to self monitor, please note-- and has been fine). --Bddpaux (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I did receive an email from you, related to the article. --Pi zero (talk) 20:47, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
You know, in my opinion: a number of the things she alleges are very important. But: we stick to neutrality here.....a slippery little eel, indeed! There are about 5 more things she alleged (fallout-type stuff etc.) that I could work in, but I just think that would be a bridge too far. I think she is telling the truth, but I have to keep the article (unto itself, on its own two feet) focused....and if I veer too far off, the written word could start sounding a bit sophmoric. --Bddpaux (talk)
I think I've dumped as many of my notes as I've got in there. --Bddpaux (talk) 16:19, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Requested deletionEdit

I nominated Plainrock124 hits 1 million subscribers for deletion because it has no newsworthy element. Could you please delete it? Thanks, ICameHereForNews (talk) 04:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thx. --Pi zero (talk) 04:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

closure of korean wikinews proposalEdit

I happened to bump into this proposal at metawiki. It is a proposal to close korean wikinews, a project that apparently has been open but not actice for ten years. I came here to find the announcement urging others to participate in the discussion, but I cannot find it. Help please? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech: I was unaware of that proposal until less than half a day ago. I don't think we were informed of it. I have a dim memory of being in touch with someone who was trying to do something with Korean Wikinews more recently than ten years ago, however I don't recall details. Very late last night I was trying to catch up with my watchlist on meta and noticed there was something going on with a proposal to close Korean Wikinews, but was unable to focus on it properly since I was barely conscious by that time of night. --Pi zero (talk) 15:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)


I am sorry to disturb you. User talk:Md Tanbir Islam

@Md Tanbir Islam: I'm happy to help. Feel free to ask. --Pi zero (talk) 17:57, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.

Please reply on the talk page of First cases of Coronavirus reported in Bangladesh. Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 17:30, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Please tell me what can i do now? I am sorry for my mistake. Please do something. Please.. Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
I am talking about Four people die of COVID-19 in Bangladesh. Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 17:10, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
@Md Tanbir Islam: Hi. I've noticed the work you've put into the article. A fresh focal event is going to be needed. The effort you've put in can help, in two ways: The things you've learned can help you to avoid past difficulties, hopefully allowing an article to get through the review process while still fresh (which is no small thing; we need writers who have already been through learning these things). And, supposing the material you've already written is verifiable from the cited sources, and not too close to the wording of the sources, it could be folded in to a revision of the article with a new focal event. (I'm being cautious, here; I don't know for sure that the existing material is verifiable and distant, because I haven't yet done an in-depth source-check on it. The government site was down, when I looked a few minutes ago.) --Pi zero (talk) 22:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. But now i can't editing that for update. Because maximum information i have written. Thank you Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 00:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

You've written all the information you have at the moment? That happens. The moment to refocus and resubmit will be as soon as some new thing becomes available as a focal event, so that we can (hopefully) review and publish the article while it's still fresh. --Pi zero (talk) 00:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Take care and be safe. Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 03:43, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I didn't understand about (clearly not refocused) Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 18:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Md Tanbir Islam: Okay, I'll try to explain better.

A Wikinews article is built around a focal event; something specific, relevant, and fresh. The headline, lede, and body of the article should all be oriented around that focal event. The headline tells the most important and unique thing about the focal event. The lede briefly summarizes the focal event. The body works outward from the focal event, providing additional information beyond what the lede said and the supporting details and context. See WN:PILLARS#style, WN:Inverted pyramid.

Atm, the the focus of the article is the fourth confirmed COVID-19 death in Bangladesh. The headline, lede, and body are all about that. An article focused on that event is not fresh. As I'm writing this comment, for an article to be fresh it would have to focus on something much more recent; for example, I think the sixth confirmed COVID-19 death in Bangladesh was confirmed either today or maybe yesterday, which if true would mean it is atm a fresh focus. The article would have to be renamed (thus changing the headline), it would need a lede that summarizes the new focus, and corresponding changes to the body. --Pi zero (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Now i understood that it so much hard for u to review a article. Thank you Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 23:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

But you said that, "the headline should be in present tense". Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 04:32, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I didn't find any source about the sixth people die of COVID-19 in Bangladesh. So i think that the fourth COVID-19 death confirmed in Bangladesh. Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 04:59, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry to disturb you again. My article is ready for reviewing. Thank you Md Tanbir Islam (talk) 03:58, 3 April 2020 (UTC)


I decided to move Tom Hanks and his wife catch coronavirus to my user space. Please delete the redirect. ICameHereForNews (talk) 01:28, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Well... we don't generally have people userspacing their own articles. I'd like to think about this... --Pi zero (talk) 01:38, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Pi zero: see Talk:Tom Hanks and his wife catch coronavirus. ICameHereForNews (talk) 07:36, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Pi zero, we can delete the article now. ICameHereForNews (talk) 07:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Tom Hanks and his wife catch coronavirusEdit

Thanks for deleting this article. Next time, when I hear a story I'm interested in, I will immediately look for sources and if there are enough I will create an article. ICameHereForNews (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

This sounds like an excellent idea. May I ask you how you read the news? Do you have a feed reader or preferred sites? Ta. Gryllida (talk) 00:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gryllida: Usually, I just hear it on the news, like on the car, or on the TV. ICameHereForNews (talk) 01:32, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I was listening to a lot of news radio when I started here. Sometimes I would draft an article based on what I'd heard and then find written sources for it. That required careful fact-checking, though. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:35, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
@ICameHereForNews: If you want, I can help you with the completion of the story. Make sure you ping me. (I will try, but I don't promise it, there are some off-wiki commitments) I know it is hard to see the hard work getting stale and deleted. But the joy of having an article published will help you get over it. I hope you choose to write something soon!.
•–• 01:41, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
@Acagastya: Sadly, the news I just watched had nothing interesting or newsworthy. ICameHereForNews (talk) 02:22, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
@ICameHereForNews: I understand if you would only prefer writing about the incidents in Australia. However, if there is something else, let me know. Also, I would strongly suggest to make the best effort you can, while writing, so that I can point out where to improve and how to improve.
•–• 02:29, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
How did the connection with Australia enter this discussion? Gryllida (talk) 02:38, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
People tend to write articles about incidents where they live. It is a general trend, but well, if you want, I will strike my comment.
•–• 02:41, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
It wasn't that I would strike it out; more like I didn't know that ICameHereForNews was from the same region. That'd be remarkable (and a pleasant discovery). Gryllida (talk) 05:32, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@Acagastya: It wasn't that it wasn't Australian. The real problem was that there was no evidence of it being newsworthy. ICameHereForNews (talk) 02:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@ICameHereForNews: if you don't mind, consider joining #wikinews live connect. You can use something like kiwiirc. There, we can talk about such incidents and what can be done. I think that could be helpful.
•–• 03:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
ICameHereForNews, the "live connect" link above is a one-click entry to the chat. Gryllida (talk) 05:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

That link #wikinews is not working. ICameHereForNews (talk) 02:05, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

click on live, @ICameHereForNews:
•–• 02:08, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
I’m still having trouble with it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by ICameHereForNews (talkcontribs)
@ICameHereForNews: Okay, go to [1], click on "Add a network", in "Server", type "irc.freenode.net", click on connect,, in "Send a message", type "/j #wikinews-en".
•–• 02:16, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Okey dokey...........Edit

.....so, things have fallen into a bit of an odd stasis 'round here. Let's just chalk it up to the bizarre state of the solar system right now! Any-hoo, there is a TEENY chance I can maybe crank out some smidge of a synthesis article about the pandemic while maybe folding a spoonful of my interview article into that? Your thoughts?? Admittedly: I had wanted my article to bring forward a bit more of 'An American in China at the start of the big mess' feel, but kinda failed in that regard....my bad. It ultimately wound up as: An American was working in China and had a bad jerk for a co-worker and her Chinese boss didn't care, nor did a bunch of other people. Oh: and a bad virus thing started while she was there too. I just think there is a drip or a drop in there that could add value to our larger project here if I can figure out where it might stick....?! --Bddpaux (talk) 22:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

My talk pageEdit

Would you please unhide the revisions on my talk page? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 23:03, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@DannyS712: it was an IP spam, who was talking about a reverted edit on incubator's AN, if that information helps.
•–• 23:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
Sure, but I'd prefer if it wasn't hidden --DannyS712 (talk) 23:12, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

keeping spam on-wiki?
•–• 23:13, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

It was reverted, so it wouldn't be visible unless people go looking --DannyS712 (talk) 23:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
@DannyS712: Although I can sympathize with dislike of having a hidden revision in one's talk page history, the LTA involved here cross-links spam revisions directly. Admins on various projects within the sisterhood have therefore taken to hiding their revisions so the revisions can't be weaponized. --Pi zero (talk) 00:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I am familiar with the LTA in question. Is there a policy on wikinews regarding revision deletion that I can refer to? --DannyS712 (talk) 00:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I feel I'd be better able to help, with all this, if I understood where you're coming from. As far as policy on revision deletion, I don't know of an en.wn policy specific to that. From what I understand, it's essentially a form of deletion. We delete spam all the time. We don't usually trouble ourselves with deleting individual revisions, of course, but that's a matter of doing less when there's no particular good-of-the-community motive to do more. --Pi zero (talk) 01:18, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I prefer to be able to read my talk page history in its entirety, and I see no compelling reason for the deletion; per Wikinews:Etiquette#Principles of Wikinews etiquette, "Avoid reverts and deletions whenever possible" - the revert makes sense, but the deletion can be avoided. If the only relevant policy is the general deletion policy, I don't see any reason for deleting text that has already been reverted (if it was a copyright violation, outing, etc. that is a different issue and deletion is called for) --DannyS712 (talk) 01:45, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Linking to specific revisions renders reversion irrelevant; one can then no longer reason that "it's been reverted, so it's gone". In that case, each unhidden spam revision is the spammer successfully using the wiki as a web host. --Pi zero (talk) 02:32, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I understand that revisions can be linked to directly, but I would still like to have the revisions restored --DannyS712 (talk) 02:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Any spam should not be visible. If it is a newly created page, one deletes it: because it is almost impossible to convert that to a genuine article. Else, if it is a revision, it is to be hidden from the public. Regardless of the page, one can't keep spam visible to the public.
•–• 02:55, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm confused: you start with "should not be visible" and end with "one can't keep spam visible to the public". If its "can't", it is incorrect, because it is fairly simple to keep visible. If it is should, I do not believe the revision deletion performed here is authorized by any wikinews community consensus. If you would like to open a discussion at Wikinews:Water cooler/policy, or start a thread at Wikinews:Deletion requests for the revision in question, that would be fine, but please restore the history of my talk page --DannyS712 (talk) 04:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I don’t know why are you confused. "Any spam should not be visible" is a goal. Anyone who has the mop and the bucket can not keep it visible to the public, because that goes against the goal. Deleting the spam is a perfectly valid reason. Think of it like this: "Injustice shouldn't happen". "One can not let injustice to happen". Can injustice happen? Yes. But one should not let it happen. If you have a good reason to point why one should go against the DR of spam, and UDEL the revision, please state it clearly. And then, we can proceed.
•–• 04:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Its hard to present a good reason without knowing what the content was. Also, I'd prefer if I could have this discussion with Pi zero, as the admin who made the deletion. --DannyS712 (talk) 04:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Pi zero is not here, at the moment. And spam calls for an admin action.
•–• 05:04, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I don't mind waiting until Pi zero is next online; its not urgent --DannyS712 (talk) 06:12, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The objective of most spam is to cause the spammed material to be visible in the default view of a page, which in turn causes the material to become listed by internet search engines. Reversion foils that objective, therefore reversion suffices — for most spam. The spam in this case is not of that sort; the LTA clearly expects to be reverted, and weaponizes still-accessible revisions containing it regardless of their not being the topmost revisions on those pages. Part of the LTA's evident objective is to create a toxic tangled inter-linking mess of such edits. For that, they don't need those revisions to be topmost. They only have to link into the ugly snarl of revisions, which they can do from outside the sisterhood. If we leave those revisions accessible, we are allowing the wikis to be exploited to web-host parts of the spam-snarl. Hiding the revisions cuts off the disease vectors, one by one. There is a compelling community interest in hiding such revisions. Thus far, I'm not aware of a reason with significant weight to un-hide the revision. I'm unclear on the reason for the request, if there's more to it than a perception that a hidden revision in the page history is untidy (which I actually do sympathize with, as remarked earlier, but it's a small thing in the larger picture of the situation). --Pi zero (talk) 13:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)


Hi, on your talk page, there is a list of archives of your talk page. How do I add that to my talk page? ICameHereForNews (talk) 03:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@ICameHereForNews: At the top of my talk page, I transclude a subpage, using code {{/archive}}. The subpage contains the verbose wiki markup to format that neat table of dated archives, at User talk:Pi zero/archive. --Pi zero (talk) 03:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Prepping Article on Global CeasefireEdit

Dear Pi Zero,

I am putting together an article for a future event (so no references yet), for which I have obtained an advance quote (OR) with email chain substantiation. Would you please check and advise on this OR aspect of the article at:

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/World_Leaders_Support_Global_Truce_in_Fight_on_Virus ?

Thank you! Johncdraper (talk) 12:11, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


The story regarding the American stranded in Africa. Why is that not a newsworthy story? and the most recent story published about it was just yesterday April 17th in a major new york city news outlet. I believe the subject is both newsworthy and updates on the story are recent especially with the new attention of the virus now reaching Africa and an estimated 300,000 could die. why wouldn't the story of someone there not be considered newsworthy? the subject is also receiving national attention abroad. Would it be ok if I asked for a second opinion and you not be the only judge and jury on the story? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NanaKofiER (talkcontribs) 16:43, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Please see Wikinews:Newsworthiness. --Pi zero (talk) 17:52, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

thank you for your time NanaKofiER (talk) 14:21, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


Thank you for being patient... NanaKofiER (talk) 20:54, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Press conference of the Chairman of the Union of Oil and Gas Producers of Russia Yuri ShafranikEdit

Sorry, I was already reviewing it and didn’t see your intervening edits. I should have put an {{under review}} but I thought it wouldn’t take more than a couple of minutes to write the things still needed. --Green Giant (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Green Giant: I'm most grateful. Hadn't gotten into it yet, and it's as well I don't have to atm since each separate such thing one immerses oneself in uses up some of one's mind's daily allocation of elasticity.

I've been on both sides of that didn't-think-the-review-comments-would-take-so-long-to-write effect. I've been thinking (for some time now, which just shows how slowly the tool development is going) that the eventual replacement for the review gadget should automatically put {{under review}} on the page when one starts up the assistant, and should also check at that time whether the article has been marked under review, which should eliminate virtually all collisions. --Pi zero (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Stores in Australia lower toilet paper limits per transaction#RequestEdit

Could you see this? ICameHere ForNews 03:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Please help me to publish thisEdit

{{editprotected}} —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abhialmish (talkcontribs) 07:42, 3 May 2020‎ (UTC)


Hi I'm on mobile so maybe I should request articles. Carloswasskins (talk) 22:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


All of my other objections to the moves of my prepared stories not withstanding, can you please leave a redirect behind when moving such pages to avoid breaking links to the drafts (like the ones displayed prominently at the top of my user page)? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 00:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)


Can you please delete L? Thanks--ValeJappo (talk) 19:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

And A. And maybe, can you block (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
@Acagastya: I see that he is online--ValeJappo (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Tracking catsEdit

Hi, can you please create tracking cats for the form of interviews? Namely, video, audio, phone, email, in-person-based. Overlapping is okay.
•–• 10:50, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Can do. Will put some thought into it (to get it right). --Pi zero (talk) 12:26, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Most of the machinery is in place; what remains is to create the specific subcategories, then add media parameters to all the {{interview}} calls. --Pi zero (talk) 06:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Subcats created. Which leaves "only" classifying the 494 interviews. --Pi zero (talk) 07:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, pizero. This really helps! :D. However, is it possible the template gives a warning if someone says "medium" instead of "media", or "e-mail" instead of "email"? I think one can blunder there. (Also, the tracking cats don't show up in the categories section as hidden cats -- it will be better if they did, so that I don't have to click edit to see if they were categorised or not.
•–• 08:50, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Medium vs media should be very easy to do.
  • Aliases for the names of particular media, I really should have thought of, they're obviously needed, but will take just a bit more machinery.
  • I should lightly rearrange those categories to use template {{tracking category}}.
--Pi zero (talk) 13:08, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
medium should now work as an alias for media. --Pi zero (talk) 13:36, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
What I'm doing atm is simply supporting those things as alternatives, which is less elegant, perhaps, that warning about them. Oh well. --Pi zero (talk) 16:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
It now supports "e-mail" as an alias for "email". Can support other alias, but just that one atm. --Pi zero (talk) 18:42, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, pizero. I was Actually thinking email should be an alias of text -- for example facebook messenger in this case: Talk:Tim Curry, TV premiere screenings, cosplay feature at Fan Expo Canada.
•–• 07:46, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

On considered inspection, these appear not to be suitable for {{tracking category}}, as tracking categories are transitory (may be empty at any given time), whereas interview-media categories are presumably permanent. So I guess I won't be adding {{tracking category}} after all.

You are suggesting, I take it, that we should add an interview-medium text and remove email, aliasing email (and e-mail) to text? --Pi zero (talk) 11:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Here's what I'd suggest.
  • To add text:
  • Additions to {{interview/media}} (without removing anything): add text to the list of interview-media; add to the list of aliases ("email" "text"), ("e-mail" "text"), and perhaps ("irc" "text") and others as deemed appropriate.
  • Once text is added to the list, an error message should appear at {{interview/media}} with a link to create the new subcat. So, create it. Once the text subcat exists, it may start to populate automatically.
  • Make sure all the articles in the email subcat are also in the text subcat before proceeding further; if they aren't, a null edit to each article —making no change, just saving the edit panel unaltered— should cause the wiki platform to update the categorization of each article.
  • There's no technical difficulty with having both a text subcat and one or more subs thereof. Each sub, such as email, would be populated and the alias would guarantee that the text parent is also populated. If we wish to remove the email sub, after the text subcat is fully populated, we'd remove email from the list of interview-media at {{interview/media}} (the alias can and perhaps should be left in place), make sure it get fully depopulated (automatically or with null edits), and delete the email subcat once empty.
--Pi zero (talk) 13:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
I've added text and irc, with suitable aliases. Last I looked, the system appeared to be in the process of populating the text subcat. --Pi zero (talk) 16:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


Hello, I am new to wikinews and unsure about the proper way to use comments. Seems in this case that it is powered both by javascript, meaning javascript is required to use comments (bad idea in my opinion). It should also be questioned why the HTML comment says "Leave this line alone. Add comments below." if the correct thing is not to add comments below, but to exit the edit interface entirely and use the javascript in the Read UI. It might be better to state that, or, better yet, have some type of abuse filter that prevents editing those pages entirely. Naleksuh (talk) 13:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Naleksuh: There should be a big button nearly the top of the comments page that says "Start a new discussion"; you're supposed to click on that button. I'm not sure whether that, specifically, requires javascript, but I don't think the wikimedia sites work very well without javascript; iirc even logging in to wikimedia, as it's supposed to function, expects javascript to be enabled. Certainly Wikinews has various important automation that won't work without it; just for instance, when a draft article is ready to be submitted for review, the primary way to do that is to click on the "Submit for review" button on the article's {{develop}} tag, and that button isn't available without javascript. --Pi zero (talk) 13:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Nah I frequently disable javascript in my web browser both as a web developer and because sketchy paywalls, and I appreciate that wikipedia has almost zero difference. The only differences are that the dialog on Special:Contributions and Special:Log are different. Other than that it's exactly the same. I even opted out of the javascript interface on recent changes because I prefer the regular one better. But Wikinews is very extensive in javascript in adding its own virtual features, which I can understand as its a good way to do so without direct server access, however, with the number of websites that abuse it regularly, it would not be uncommon to see it disabled.
It might be a good idea to clarify in the edit comment that comments are not added via editing the page and / or prevent such pages from being edited from non-admins via some type of edit filter.
Also, it appears that 99% of the pages on Special:Random are archived. Is there any way to see "fresh" pages only?
Thanks for information about Wikinews and comments so far, has been helpful in getting the situation sorted out, will hopefully edit here even more in the coming days Naleksuh (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
I completely sympathize on the problems of javascript. When I'm reviewing, which requires me to access all the sources of the article I'm reviewing, I use a different browser just so I can work with javascript turned off by default, only whitelisted for certain sites — including Wikinews, because we have a large amount of automation here all dependent on javascript. News sites tend to abuse javascript, and some of them —not even malicious ones as such— are among the most appallingly heavy javascript sites I've seen (I've had my browser crash on contact with some of them). It is, actually, politically impossible for us to move all our automation inside the wiki platform so it wouldn't use javascript; the Wikimedia Foundation jealously hoards centralized control of such things (just as well I not get started on a rant about that). The bottom line is, there is no alternative to using javascript for needed customizations, and Wikinews relies especially heavily on these sorts of customizations; in fact, we'd never have survived this long without our key customized automations, and we need more than we now have and are constantly working to create more (not more javascript, necessarily; my own efforts are to provide a minimal set of javascript tools whose purpose is to empower doing everything else in wiki markup).

Almost all of the articles on en.wn are fully protected; a news article is a snapshot in time, and our archives of such snapshots, preserved and displayed under glass as it were, going back about fifteen years, are a huge asset (in multiple senses). We always keep at least ten most-recently-published articles unprotected (though our archive policy kicks in, prohibiting further substantive changes, 24 hours after publication), as samples of our output; these are displayed on our main page. --Pi zero (talk) 14:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Not just javascript in general, but also that content is added via the read interface is a bit confusing in general, for those familiar with wikis but not with wikinews. Not a huge deal as I understand now, but confusing at first.
I am aware of the archive policy, but I mean if there is any way to get any random non-archived article. "No" is a fine answer here, just that the current Random function seems rather useless Naleksuh (talk) 06:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: On the main page, you can see a list of the links which are not archived -- anything older that those are archived.
•–• 06:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, recent changes shows that an IP edited Talk:"University_of_Queensland" even though that page does not exist anymore, it was moved to Talk:University_of_Queensland. Is this another wikinews feature, or just a mediawiki bug? Naleksuh (talk) 06:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Neither a feature, nor a bug. If you create foo and then someone moves it to bar without leaving a redirect -- it is not purged from the RC.
•–• 06:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
It is on other wikis though Naleksuh (talk) 06:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

that is how mediawiki is supposed to work.
•–• 06:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


Why are there no Checkusers on Wikinews? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ICameHereForNews (talkcontribs) 02:34, 4 June 2020‎ (UTC)

What you want there is four tidles: ~~~~

We always went to great effort to make sure we had our own checkusers. However, the Foundation does not allow a project to have just one local checkuser, on the theory that it's too much power for one person to hold without a second person to act as a check on them; so if a project has only two, and one of them loses their checkuser status, the Foundation suspends the other as well. It's my impression that on Wikipedia, if a checkuser appears to be inactive, they're likely to receive a polite inquiry; but, whether that's so or not, it certainly isn't the Foundation's attitude toward small wikis, so when one of our two checkusers was seen to be over the line on inactivity, they yanked both our CUs without attempting to be polite to anyone. --Pi zero (talk) 02:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

So is there anyway they could be brought back? ICameHere ForNews 05:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, by writing two nominations for local CUs. I think this is work in progress. --Gryllida (talk) 06:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Who can give users checkuser rights? ICameHere ForNews 23:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Technically, I believe, Stewards. The Foundation perceives, I think, a legal concern with the handling of private information by CUs, hence the various constraints on the voting process etc. --Pi zero (talk) 00:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)


There was a bit of a scare this week, and it looked like LiquidThreads might break. It looks like it's going to be okay this time after all, and it may (hopefully) hang on for years, but it's reminded me that it's really just one catastrophic bug away from an unscheduled removal. Do you have any preference for its (eventual) replacement? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:33, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I've been hoping to eventually replace LQT with something using dialog. My development of dialog-based semi-automated assistants is really difficult development that has been moving even more slowly than I'd hoped, and I was already figuring it would take several years. But I'll put some thought to perhaps prioritizing that particular application of it.

Several years ago, with the Foundation pushing Flow especially at the time, we had a community discussion here on this subject. Though LQT breaking was not something we discussed then. Key take-aways from that, as I recall, were that  (1) Flow sucks, and  (2) although LQT is something we all kind of love to hate, and everyone was very clear that wiki markup is what talk pages should always be, for the peculiar function of opinions pages LQT is actually a great improvement over the old wiki-based talk pages. We had, I remember, a project veteran who recalled that in the Before Time, when our opinions pages were straight wiki pages, we were forever pouring effort into fixing misformatted comments — because, of course, writing discussion comments is a moderate-level use of wiki markup, not something likely to go smoothly for someone with zero prior experience of wiki markup, which is a common case for the opinions page of a news article.

@Bawolff: Any thoughts on this? --Pi zero (talk) 01:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Its not like flow is being developed anymore either (Or is it? Was always pretty ambigious what the state is). I guess i don't work here anymore so i can be a bit more frank in my views on flow. I personally like LQT better than flow, although flow could probably reasonable replace LQT for the opinions page use case (flow is more polished but misunderstanding use cases. I think it suffered from unclear vision statement and pivoting to different visions through its development, well at the same time being opinionated in its design decisions. After all it was originally envisioned as a facebook walltype feature or maybe something similar to say Asana's "inbox" feature, which is very different from a talk page. LQT is hacky and ugly, but very flexible and more suited for wiki workflows). I appreciate the maintenance problem is critical, although translatewiki still uses it, perhaps that will direct the minimum of maintenance required. Beyond that, not sure what to say. If LQT dies then it dies and we'll have to move to something. There's no obvious candidate right now, so unless its death is imminent i guess i would say don't worry about things that might be that you don't have the power to change. Bawolff 08:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Flow hasn't been in active development for years. The Product department has declined all requests to have more wikis use it. Maybe they'd rather have more Flow, if it meant removing LQT from the servers, but I think they'd rather turn everything into plain wikitext pages. I don't think that Dialog has been considered at all. I don't know if you've looked at the mw:Talk pages project/replying tool and the related work on starting new discussions, but it should reduce the misformatted-comments problem.
It looks like there's no emergency here, but please keep it in mind. No software lasts forever, so someday we'll need to figure out a replacement for LQT. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
I've been gently suggesting for years that everything should be done in ordinary wiki text, on the theory that there's not much point in having an idea and not sharing it with others. Using wiki text for everything is also what dialog is about, of course: supporting interactive pages through ordinary wiki markup. (It's both easier and harder that one might think, as I've been discovering these past several years.) The idea of facilitating reply is something I've had in mind for dialog, and may well have mentioned to someone at the WMF at some point; I was heartened to note recently the Foundation is doing something of that nature, though I've been plenty busy with my own thing and haven't yet taken time out to study what they're up to. --Pi zero (talk) 18:47, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
The newest version finally reached (five of) the wikis. Click on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Talk_pages_project?dtvisual=1 and try it out. Local testing at any wiki should be enabled soon-ish (maybe this week's train). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:35, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you help?Edit

An editor by the name of "Vote (X) for Change" has been globally locked. It made 35 edits ten years ago on en:wp. It has zero edits on commons but has been indefinitely blocked there. On en:wp "Vote (X) for Change"'s talk page access was restored in 2016 but was revoked again one minute later. This seems unduly harsh, while the global lock is indefensible. How can these actions be reversed? 2A00:23C5:E117:6100:81C9:C123:97E8:D24A (talk) 15:21, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

There's a page at meta about how to appeal global locks. --Pi zero (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The following log entry appears on that page:

20:48, 15 July 2018 Trijnstel talk contribs changed protection level for Steward requests/Global [Edit=Allow only autoconfirmed users] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) (Persistent vandalism: let's make this indefinite, no reason to keep this open for anons) (hist)

What does the appellant do now? 2A00:23C5:E117:6100:4CDB:9C90:9664:4A9B (talk) 18:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Send an email to stewards at wikimedia dot org and explain why the lock should be lifted. --Green Giant (talk) 15:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The editor doesn't have email. Any request would be directed to you as you performed the lock. The relevant page states:

As a general rule, global locks happen almost always in clear-cut situations


  • Accounts that have been used only for vandalism or abuse on multiple wikis and are actively vandalizing now or obviously are otherwise being disruptive on multiple wikis are candidates for a global lock.

Can you please explain the reasoning that led you to perform the lock? 2A00:23C5:E117:6100:9180:E6F5:51C7:3E2F (talk) 17:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Please carry on this discussion on the wiki where this happened. Neither this project, nor the page is appropriate for this discussion.
•–• 17:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Discussion transferred to Green Giant's en:wp talkpage