Wikinews:Accreditation requests

Shortcut:
WN:AR

To file a request for credentials or for revocation, please read over the Accreditation policy first. You can also view the accredited users list.

If you would like to receive official Wikinews credentials, please type your username after the slash in the box below, click "request", then follow the instructions. After you have posted, the user's entry will solicit Support/Object votes from Wikinews users for the duration of 7 days for accreditation and 14 for revocation. At the expiration of this time period the user will either be granted accreditation, or the vote removed from this page and archived. In the case of revocation a case may be closed early, but no earlier than 7 days, when there is overwhelming consensus.

Upon successful accreditation

Once accredited, you can get a personal email address on WN-Reporters. Please contact acagastya or Gryllida about this; your email address will be made up based on the details given when applying — if you have a middle name and you feel having this in the address (or its initial) is important, please say so. (Historically, Brian McNeil was in-charge of handing out the email id for new accredited reporters.) You must either provide an existing email address for the password to be sent to, or have enabled email from your en.wikinews account and specify this as the preferred contact method. For further information, contact an active, established, already-accredited user. Requests for an email address must be verifiable — either submit via 'email this user', or signed, and on Brian McNeil's talk page.

In addition to a wikinewsie.org email address, accredited reporters may — at their own expense — obtain a stock of business cards clearly indicating they are an accredited reporter. You can see a sample here. (Note, degraded to a quality that prevents use.)

Current requests

JJLiu112 (talk)

Name: J.J. Liu (刘家辉)

Location: Plano, Texas, United States of America

Areas of interest: Matters of political and cultural significance in the United States

Reason: Supporting my claims as a genuine, trustworthy reporter would be greatly benefitted with a proper accreditation and e-mail address; I would also like to preserve my gmail account for more personal, non-Wikinews endeavours.

Accomplishments: In addition to writing over 20 published articles (two OR), including the eighth longest on the web site, I am a columnist for Dialogue & Discourse and Logos News. I have written multiple articles for English Wikipedia.

Contact information: dadoufu123 gmail ● com

User ID: 2,780,319

Applied on: 02:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Comments/Questions

Good to see you nominating yourself, @JJLiu112:, because I had been thinking "if it is time to nominate him or not?" I hope you would not mind answering the following questions. (It should be noted, these aren't test questions, this is purely to see what you genuinely know, how others can benefit from your experience, and how others can help/guide you.)
•–• 14:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

• Question Right now, I see you have two interviews published, which is great! Tell me what are the things you have learned when working on those interviews, JJ? (I write this reciting it in your voice "it is an open-ended question" :P)
  •–• 05:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, Acagastya. What I've learned from my two interviews (with hopefully more on the way) can be summarised as three items: how to communicate respectfully but effectively, several technical and conflict resolution skills that prove equally invaluable (YouTube captioning, sending files from recorder to computer, editing precise wording on the spot as the situation evolves, handling potential and actualised conflict) and, in general, how to facilitate and maintain the momentum of a professional interview such as that I get my answers, while the interviewee is able to mention all their points. --JJLiu112 (talk) 13:45, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

• Question What are some of the things you wish you had done differently, for these interviews?
  •–• 14:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I believe I could have allocated my time more wisely. I scheduled both calls to begin roughly forty-five minutes from each other; thankfully, my first interviewee (Adrian Mizher) finished under that time, though Ms Chatham seemed unwilling to reciprocate. In addition, I could have worked faster and more diligently on the transcription process, which have hindered efforts more than I would have anticipated. I have learned my lessons and will not repeat them in the future. --JJLiu112 (talk) 14:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

• Question Doing too many audio interviews, in my experience, have been extremely frustrating at times since it causes fatigue. Have you considered it, and how do you plan to maintain a balance?
  •–• 14:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

As proven from my first inquisitive e-mail, I have been able and willing to do interviews by text from the beginning. Since the first two have been published, I've been actively seeking new interviewees, including from non-US countries, though all falling through for one reason or another (I asked many candidates in the May UK elections the day before Prince Philip's passing, for example, when all parties stopped campaigning); in short, I have considered the possibility of excessive strain from the beginning and am able to adapt to multiple mediums as appropriate and requested. --JJLiu112 (talk) 14:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

• Question What do you expect from the AR Wikinewsies, if your requested is accepted?
  •–• 14:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

As explained in the request, I'm hoping for increased credibility in requesting interviews and permissions to attend events (post-COVID, obviously), in addition to having real identifiers that prove my legitimacy. I plan to print and laminate my press pass, for example, and conduct interviews by my wikinewsie e-mail, if accreditation is approved. --JJLiu112 (talk) 15:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

How do you plan on using the press pass and the email? And are those the only two things you are expecting? Or are there more? Please note -- this is genuinely important question for us, to be able to provide for the needs of the 'newsies.
•–• 15:02, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I would like to use it as a supplement to my existing credentials when interviewing people of note or entering events of note to legitimise my request. I do not intend on exploiting this privilege. --JJLiu112 (talk) 16:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Let me rephrase, this is genuinely important question for us, to be able to provide for the needs of the 'newsies. What are the things you expect? Is a press pass and email sufficient? Or do you require any additional things? Please provide precise answer so I can provide precise help with the tools. And while we are at it (since you brought this up), tell me, how would exploiting the privs, if (in some circumstance) you don't even know you are exploiting them?
•–• 17:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Alright. I would like a Press ID card and a wikinewsie e-mail, and no more. I would expect that, and no more. As for exploiting the 'privs', I will not knowingly and maliciously misconstrue the privileges and opportunities (if) granted to me by the community, nor will I desecrate the names of Wikinews or the Wikimedia Foundation in the process. I will accept all liability in case of any incident, and I will personally ensure the reputation of Wikinews remains untarnished throughout. Hopefully this answer is sufficient. I realise granting accreditation has its own natural risks, and have my own rational doubts on my infallibility as a contributor and journalist. Therefore, I will refrain from any extraneous request (once again, Press ID card and e-mail only), and avoid, to the best of my ability, the misuse of Wikinews as an organisation. --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Since you don't need new tools, I don't have to install new tools on the server. In your opinion, what are the things you can use the wn-reporters.org (wnr from now on) email, and what are some of the things you should not be using the email for? (Actually, this is something I tell newsies right before granting the email, but if you already understand, I wouldn't have to repeat, and even better: I know you understand this)
•–• 03:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
If I am not mistaken, surely standard etiquette applies. DO: Send e-mails for interviews through wnr. DON'T: Send anything unrelated. DO: Respond to any queries by Wikinews users on wnr, if received there. DON'T: Chat about today's homework to a school friend. DO: Keep up to date and informed on the news, and be proactive in requests for a quick chat. DON'T: Sign up for e-mail newsletters, or enter oneself in raffles, contests, political parties, etc. DO: Ask oneself before every e-mail sent whether it represents the organisation in a good light. DON'T: Hesitate to ask on IRC for any help. DO: Be respectful, courteous and succinct. DON'T: Be a dick. DO: Provide status updates to interviewees. DON'T: Be a dick. Did I get it all? --JJLiu112 (talk) 14:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Actually, you are just slightly off. You can sign up for newsletters if you would like. I could not stop you or even know if you were subscribed to some. Though you should not put scoop in the subscriber's list. If you find something that scoop will benefit from, feel free to share the resource, but don't subject others to the mailing list they did not want to see -- I WILL block any unsolicited emails that were sent to scoop. I won't say misuse, but an ill-use would be forwarding large files to scoop via the email -- we have files. for that purpose. Scoop is a mailing list, so if you forward a 5 MB file and there are five people using the scoop, 30 MB (5 for your inbox, 5*5 for scoop) will be wasted. Instead, consider putting it on files. (that is like self-hosted Google Drive/dropbox) and enable sharing the file with the scoop. One more ill-use would be to forward emails that you have received to wnr to outside domains (notable exception is when the reviewer does not have access to scoop). Space needs to be treated as a resource. Hosting the servers cost us ~ USD5.9/month, and we are funding it from our pocket. We want ARs to benefit from wnr, and ideally we would not want the monetary burden be upon the ARs. Donations are welcome, and using the email service is gratis.

Question Given the space is a resource, what do you propose we should do, if you receive spam email? I want your suggestion -- we have a mechanism in place, but I want to find best solution to keep things running smoothly.
103.48.105.191 (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete them. Not a concern of mine. --JJLiu112 (talk) 00:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Right now, the mechanism is to forward any spam or unnecessary unwanted email to spam@wnr before your delete them. If someone spams you once, they will spam us again. So best to forward it to spam@wnr, where it will be blocked.
•–• 05:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Sure. --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Question What do you know about scoop and are you convinced you should be granted scoop access? (This seems like a trick question, but no, this is yet another opportunity to formally document on-wiki, the knowledge, that is usually passed orally for many years.)
103.48.105.191 (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I have inferred scoop is controlled by you (or a joint group of admins/bureaucrats), and is where one forwards all evidence for the benefit of verifiable collection and entry of information upon the completion of an interview, facilitated or instigated in part by e-mail. --JJLiu112 (talk) 00:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

That is not quite correct, though not entirely wrong. Scoop is a mailing list, which forwards emails to people who are a part of that mailing list. I add/remove people from the list upon request, and I make sure the server is running -- that is all that I control. I think if you re-read your explanation, you might get the correct answer for who is a part of this group -- if one forwards evidence for the purpose of verification, that group is...? (Also, should you be granted scoop access?)
•–• 05:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Admins? --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Reviewers, JJ. Reviewers are the ones who will review the ORs and they require scoop access.
•–• 20:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC) Question Your first interview is published and archived. Which makes it eligible to be nominated for a wn:featured article. What are the things, in your opinion, that interview has, so it can be a featured article? What are some of the things, in your opinion, it lacks, so it might not be one? (Again, this is not a trick question)
•–• 05:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I think my interviews had the scrutiny and composition which would fulfil its criteria of informativeness; its relevance to the current political climate also cannot be denied. Both, in fact, involved mentions of very current events which prove themselves almost a time-capsule of sorts for the future; the effects of Donald Trump in polarisation, COVID-19 as an impact factor. It certainly features original content and not better, but incomparable coverage to mainstream news outlets, not one of which have, to my knowledge, regarded the election any more than superficially. The benefit of a small organisation, I suppose. That being said, original photos were not absent, unless you count the photos of the interviewees lifted from Twitter or their web site, and I wouldn't say evdence of collaboration was particularly present. --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I will add my points in the morning, and run pwb and nominate GG and RbAus once i get some time.
•–• 20:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I will just put it on the nomination page instead.
•–• 08:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

• One last Question, and this is the most important one of all: what are some of the things the reviewer reviewing your articles (for those who don't know, it was me) could have done better? What should have been done differently? And what should have been avoided? You do not need to worry about saying something unpleasant. I am learning from experience just like anyone else. And cent per cent honesty would be appreciated. And so that you don't worry about your answer, I will cast my vote before you answer.
  •–• 20:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

That's a difficult question to answer. I suppose the most pressing grievance is also the one you have the least control of: time. It's quite disappointing when every article is forced to near stale before finally getting reviewed, but of course your time is your own and I don't blame you for anything, just a general annoyance. I do wonder what the Twitter followers think when we post something President Biden did three days after he did it... Not many other active reviewers, you know yourself with your own articles 'ready to be reviewed' for a good year. I am generally frustrated with some of the editorial decisions yourself and pi made, and while arguable I'm still left disappointed at the outcome. The whole 'France Prime Minister' 'French Prime Minister' débâcle, or the decision to start every sentence not immediately obvious with "As reported in..." "According to..." The addition and removal of wikilinks is another, in that I don't think that every remotely unfamiliar phrase deserves a Wiktionary mention, and I do think things which can be reasonably implied...should be done so. Overall, pretty standard complaints I'd wager, you've done an overall lovely job. Pi was a bit more hands-off, though. --JJLiu112 (talk) 02:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

The question was about reviewing interviews. Reviewing interviews is very different from reviewing a synthesis. The whole France-French thing -- we are supposed to control how our RSS feed looks like. I asked for a solution on the talk page, and got no answer. As far as attribution is concerned, I have stated in the last few review comments, JJ, either find the original source, the statement, where it was put; and if we can't we need to attribute where the info came from. If say the BBC reports a quote, and if we publish in our own words, we are taking away their hard work to earn that quote; and if they incorrectly report something, we are doing the same. Attribution helps in both ways. If you don't want to attribute, carry out the investigative journalism, find every opportunity the governor had a chance to veto, but didn't, and say he never once veto'd. Otherwise, it is unethical to take someone's research, state it, and not give the credit where it is due. A word which is not commonly used in a normal conversation, which has some importance to the context and the interpretation of the source is linked -- though we don't have to; anyone who is curious can open a dictionary if they want; but then, the similar argument can be applied to the encyclopædia links -- anyone who is interested will do their own research. The problem being the links were way too encyclopædic; hard to verify that is precisely what it was, and even had bias from omission. There is indeed a difference between an editorial piece of journalism and a news report. Suggested reading works well for the former, not for the latter. Do we have multiple forms of journalism on-wiki, yes. But should we treat news report just the same? No.

I have only one question: why did you randomly decide to quit for a day? Leaderboard (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Apologies if I troubled you. I had a bit of a nervous breakdown there, hasn't happened for a while but stress got to me. Apologies. --JJLiu112 (talk) 15:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

I have had fair share of such experiences; don't apologise -- we are all volunteers. Just take things slow, and if needed, take a few days off-wiki. Some things can wait, but don't act impulsively which you might later regret. Good to have you back, JJ.
•–• 15:36, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Life has been difficult, sure you know yourself. --JJLiu112 (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

• Comment JJ, for non-cyclic aperiodic articles, it is important for the interviewer to explain the circumstances of, and methods and procedures used to do, the interview. You have not been doing that, and that is something expected from both ARs and non-ARs alike.
  •–• 04:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Votes

I'm not sure why Agastya is dumping questions to the nominee, but I'll Support this nomination, for obvious reasons in terms of experience and work. Leaderboard (talk) 18:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Why the heck not? Original reporting is one of the most important things on enwn; and accumulated knowledge which we can share is crucial. We don't have pi or brian to pass on the information to JJ, and these questions will enable other AR's like @Bddpaux, Gryllida, Mikemoral, RockerballAustralia, William S. Saturn: to help JJ, if they can advice something or share from their experience. If you haven't read my message above, @Leaderboard: "It should be noted, these aren't test questions, this is purely to see what you genuinely know, how others can benefit from your experience, and how others can help/guide you." I have to look after the server and meet the demands of the newsies, so I need to better understand their requirements. I am the one who designs the cards now, so I need to know what is needed. I am the one reviewing the articles these days, and I need to understand how the reporter is tackling the problems, if I can guide them with the knowledge I have gathered; so we can, as a reporter and reviewer, work efficiently.
103.48.105.191 (talk) 18:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Well thanks, I'm glad I earned your trust --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:08, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

• Strong support. I have personally enjoyed reviewing the articles. It was breath of fresh air and something @Pi zero, Blood Red Sandman, William S. Saturn: will be proud to have read. Such a misfortune pi could not see your brilliant work. I was wondering to nominate JJ for the past two weeks, just the commitments got in the way. JJ can learn and improve, no doubt, but as a newbie to interviews; he outdid most of the people who joined within the last six years. Now that I notice, this is my first wikinews anniversary when I was no longer in college.
  •–• 20:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
• Support - based on answers to the above questions and the excellent recent articles including several interviews. The only thing I would say on top of the above is to exercise patience before, during and after the review process. --Green Giant (talk) 15:03, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Recently closed requests

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Luke seems to be unresponsive, and therefore, I am closing this request.
•–• 06:02, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

LFaraone (talk)

Name: Luke Faraone

Location: San Francisco, California, USA

Areas of interest: Tech policy, US federal/state/local technology practices, health care

Reason: Principally, making freedom of information requests to US agencies

Accomplishments: English Wikipedia administrator, former enwiki ArbCom, former enwiki CheckUser and Oversight

Contact information: wikipedia @ luke ● wf

User ID: 198529

Applied on: 02:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Comments/Questions

• Accreditation is a mutually beneficial arrangement, in which Wikinews vouches for the reporter's ethical behavior, and the reporter contributes —ethnically— to Wikinews. The question of ethical behavior is only partly separable from that of contribution to Wikinews, because a user's accumulated reputation on Wikinews is central to our assessment of them. (See Wikinews:Never assume.)

  Afaics, you have never contributed to Wikinews. Do you have any plans to do so? --Pi zero (talk) 21:11, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

  Yep! This was requested specifically to assist with a story I'm beginning to research around changes in the availability of public health resources offered by the National Library of Medicine. LFaraone (talk) 04:55, 25 February 2021‎ (UTC)

  Thank you for your response. Would you intend to conduct the interviews by email or by phone? What kind of original reporting activity would you volunteer to undertake? Regards, --Gryllida (talk) 03:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

• As I understand LFaraone would like to have a press pass, in order to get the details, first. A phone/email-based interview will follow soon. I am okay granting them a temporary press pass, valid through April. Depending on how his first article goes, we can then decide about his AR status.
  •–• 07:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
• I have tried reaching out to @LFaraone: on IRC and via Special:Email and they seem to be unresponsive. I will let this sit for a week. And if I don't hear from him, I will close it as unresponsive, let again some time later.
  •–• 04:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Given there is support, and good comments by four reviewers and admins; two of which are ARs and three having scoop access, closing this as successful.
  •–• 05:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

LivelyRatification (talk)

Name: Alison Newman

Location: Melbourne, Australia

Areas of interest: Politics, music

Reason: Conducting interviews

Accomplishments: I'm proud of my first 2 articles, which, despite relatively short notice, managed to get all done before the deadline. I think they turned out quite well!

• Wikinews interviews Craig Farquharson, Liberal Democrat candidate for 2020 Groom by-election
• Wikinews interviews Sandra Jephcott, Sustainable Australia candidate for 2020 Groom by-election

Contact information: aaaaaalison.n @ gmail ● com

User ID: 2819075

Applied on: 21:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Questions

• Question @LivelyRatification: given a chance to interview someone, how would you describe your relation with Wikinews?
  •–• 21:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I would describe myself as an independent journalist, and if necessary, that I'm seeking to publish in Wikinews, as per WN:OR. --LivelyRatification (talk) 21:49, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

• Question @LivelyRatification: according to you, what are some of the roles and responsibilities that comes with being an AR?
  •–• 21:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Being an accredited reporter gives you the privilege of press access as a contributor for the Wikinews project. As an AR, the most vital thing to do is to uphold Wikinews' pillars and our code of ethics, namely WN:NPOV. ARs should be able to demonstrate that they can, and have, stayed true to these principles in their prior articles as a Wikinewsie. --LivelyRatification (talk) 22:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

• Question @LivelyRatification: Hi from Sydney. Glad to see you here. May I ask you what prior experience has helped you with writing news confidently? --Gryllida (talk) 08:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't have that much prior experience, really. Writing has always been something I've enjoyed doing, though, and I'm an occasional contributor to Wikipedia. --LivelyRatification (talk) 09:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment I should point out, LivelyRatification has three published articles (two being exclusive interviews), has three articles in the RQ, and is working on more interviews.
•–• 09:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Would be interested in knowing a couple general words your writing experience off-wiki, as it may help me with finding venues to get new contributors from. --Gryllida (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

• Question What software do you use to assist you in news writing? --Gryllida (talk) 08:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't use software that much -- I just tend to start writing on Wikinews itself in a big draft, with all my sources open in other tabs. --LivelyRatification (talk) 09:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks LivelyRatification. A bit irrelevant to this nomination, but what web browser are you using? --Gryllida (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Google Chrome. --LivelyRatification (talk) 20:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! --Gryllida (talk) 23:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Comments

Comment I had reviewed both of the articles, (though having published) one, and I was fairly impressed by a newcomer doing a very good job for an OR. Do they have a scope of improvement? Definitely. Learning is a forever process. But, they show signs of a good Wikinewsie. I am pleased to see their nomination.
•–• 21:26, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment Whilst I appreciate the enthusiasm, I want to follow the accreditation policy, which has a small number of suggested criteria, which I have abridged below:

• Formalities: signed, dated, reason included, articles listed.
• Being an established, and published, Wikinews contributor.
  • User:LivelyRatification has been contributing for about two and a half months. This is too short a time to have become an established contributor.
• Having started, and substantially contributed to, several Wikinews articles.
  • This criterion is vague on the meaning of "several" but User:LivelyRatification has at least five articles published.
• Demonstrable commitment to NPOV, as shown by contributions and the text of the application.
  • Having read the five articles by the applicant, I think this is not in doubt.

--Green Giant (talk) 00:55, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Votes

• Support, based on the above discussion and written articles. --Gryllida (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
• I support LivelyRatification's nomination, and I would continue discussing with her off-wiki, sharing my experience, and things I have learned over the years.
  •–• 18:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support. I'm comfortable the nominee will comport themselves upholding Wikinews's reputation, based (as Gryllida notes) on writing and above discussion. --Pi zero (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support on the basis of meeting most criteria and giving decent answers to the questions from other Wikinewsies. --Green Giant (talk) 00:56, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• The request is premature. The user is invited to become more involved in the community. --Pi zero (talk) 00:49, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Dehgel (talk)

Name: Deh Saaduddin

Location: Marawi City, Philippines

Areas of interest: Politics, Technology, Humanitarian, Social, Justice

Reason: It is my passion to contribute to Wikipedia, when I found WikiNews, I feel more energy to contribute news here.

User ID: Dehgel

Applied on: 03:01, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Questions

• Your passion may have shifted from Wikipedia to Wikinews, but why do you need Accreditation to do contribute? I have been on Wikinews for 12+ years and contributed news, even original reporting, all without Accreditation. You must demonstrate a need and base line of understanding Wikinews as a project. We do not hand out these credentials like candy. --SVTCobra 20:33, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• Wikinews accreditation is extended to someone we trust and whom we expect to use the accreditation to contribute to Wikinews. You express no interest in contributing here, and in any case you have not attempted to do so and, thus, have neither demonstrated interest in contributing here, nor earned reputation to support your claim on our trust. A request for accreditation is premature. See Wikinews:Pillars of writing, and consider attempting either a synthesis article or, conceivably, a photo essay. --Pi zero (talk) 17:34, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Clarification: You should not be asking for accreditation now, before you've done anything here. You should contribute for a while; write articles; get to know Wikinews writing, while the Wikinews community gets to know you; and then perhaps, it will be time for you to apply for accreditation. --Pi zero (talk) 03:24, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

• I am copying a question/answer I put up at user's talk page:

'I noticed that you are seeking accreditation here. Have you contributed here in the past few weeks??--Bddpaux (talk) 19:59, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Bddpaux, Only just one have published while other has drafted.' --Bddpaux (talk) 17:57, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

• I am going to say some things here and I hope you do not find them offensive (as they are not meant to be). Yours is a common situation we face here. You come here, do a few small things, then quickly ask for accreditation. It appears that you have vanished from this project. There are MANY THINGS one can do here (and in the journalistic world-at-large) without being accredited. You come here, asking us to give, while seemingly being unwilling to give of yourself to this project. We need doers here.....not takers. I promise you: I'm not trying to scold you.......I mean that. I have learned some incredible things here: my writing has improved 200% since I joined this project. Yes, in the early days: I got my feelings hurt, got offended, whined and had a couple of (minor) tantrums, but ALWAYS CAME BACK. A wiki is a community......you give (a lot) and you take (a little)......that is how it works. Wikinews has opened AMAZING DOORS for me. I have met (IRL) some awesome people while conducting interviews, etc. Those doors can open for you too if you are willing to DO THINGS, not just talk. If you really want to be a part of what is happening here, I welcome you (and so do many others). I will help you. I will encourage you (and have tried to do just that)....but you have to stick with it. We really are a pretty friendly, cooperative bunch here...I mean that. It's too early for us to extend acceditation to you. Come back, do a little editing on developing articles: drop in a comma here, take out a couple of strange words there.....that kind of stuff. Just plain, mundane work: that is a lot of what journalism is. I hope to see your work soon! --Bddpaux (talk) 16:49, 4 September 2019 (UTC).

• Hello guys (Pi zero, Bddpaux, synthesis, Cobra)! I'm asking to limit this comment because this is old one. I have requested this accreditation when I firstly met Wikinews without knowledge on the Pillars of writing and other important details, sorry for that because I haven't read anything here before this request. I understand you guys. If possible, can anybody remove this accreditation? I feel uncomfortable after my words here and this request. -_-' I am busy for this time taking my graduate study. I'll be working for this community, the Wikinews, sooner as a matured volunteer and please expect me as new like you. Wiki is really an amazing community, I can prove that. --Dehgel (talk) 16:49, 12 September 2019 (UTC).

Votes

• Oppose See my comments, above. --Pi zero (talk) 17:34, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose ....trying to remain optimistic. --Bddpaux (talk) 16:51, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• The request is premature. A veteran Wikinewsie has volunteered to help the user to build a local reputation, which highlights that the user doesn't have one now. The user can re-apply after earning one. --Pi zero (talk) 01:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Alex Filipov (talk)

Name: Aleksandar Filipov

Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Areas of interest: Sports Photography - Portfolio: @a.s.photoz on Instagram

Reason: Spreading the Magic of Sport all around the Globe

Accomplishments: Graduated Medicine in 2010 in Varna, Bulgaria, several publications in the Internet Press and a few contributed pictures to Wikipedia Commons, some of them front images on the athletes' own Wikipedia pages.

Contact information: amateursportsfotografie@gmail.com - My porfolio is on Instagram - @a.s.photoz

User ID: I am sorry I clicked "Preferences" - but I didn't find ID

Applied on: 20:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

My idea to contribute to Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons and Wikinews is not by writing articles - I take photos and contribute them to Wikipedia,Wikimedia Commons and Wikinews. I contacted both Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, it turned out that only Wikinews provides official accreditation press card. Neither Wikipedia nor Wikimedia Commons provides official press card. Federations like FINA, FIBA, FIVB or FIG requires that kind of a card to allow you to be there and shoot major world sport stars. At major championships there are guys, who write and guys who shoot - i am from the "shooters". In every media no one asks a photo-journalist to write an article - they only want cool pictures from him/her.

My publications on the Internet:

http://lap.bg/voleibolnaligananaciitebraziliqfranciq16062018 https://www.beautyinsport.com/balgarkite-zapochnaha-na-evropejskoto-po-gimnastika-galeriya/ - in Cyrillic https://www.beautyinsport.com/en/32nd-european-women-s-artistic-gymnastics-championships-gallery/ https://www.beautyinsport.com/rusiya-s-titla-v-artistichnoto-pluvane-duetat-ni-18-i-snimki/ - in Cyrillic https://www.beautyinsport.com/en/synchronised-swimming-european-championships-gallery/ https://www.beautyinsport.com/rusiya-s-otborna-titla-razlichni-shampionki-na-uredite-obzor-i-snimki/ - in Cyrillic https://www.beautyinsport.com/ansambalat-na-turtsiya-s-kontrolni-trenirovki-vav-varna-galeriya-video/ http://bgswim.com/photos.php?g_id=184 http://bgswim.com/photos.php?g_id=185 http://bgswim.com/photos.php?g_id=186 http://bgvolleyball.com/photos.php?g_id=2900 http://bgvolleyball.com/photos.php?g_id=2921 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilia_Akhaimova https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axelle_Klinckaert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilaria_K%C3%A4slin

Comments

• You have no earned reputation on Wikinews. We extend accreditation to someone we trust and who we expect to use the accreditation to contribute to Wikinews. Note, trust in this case goes to more than just taking good pictures; there's a matter of professional journalistic behavior. A request for accreditation seems quite premature. Are you interested in contributing to Wikinews, either synthesis articles or even photo essays? You may find Wikinews:Pillars of writing helpful as perspective on what we do here. --Pi zero (talk) 20:53, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
• Tell you what: contact me on my talk page and let's see if we can collaborate on a few things....ok? Reputation is important here and that can only be built via time and effort. --Bddpaux (talk) 01:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

....and, the Beauty In Sport site appears to be glitching....so, please post some better links to what you've submitted over at Commons and I will take a look. There is a chance we can work with someone who ONLY takes photos, but you have to be able to bend and flex a little bit too. Again: reputation matters here. --Bddpaux (talk) 01:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Votes

• Oppose I'm sympathetic to the lack of assistance from Commons and the 'pedia, but Wikinews is neither of those places. You've never even tried to collaborate on a photoessay, with your photos paired against somebody else's brief writeup, and your response to being asked to do so is very hostile. That doesn't fill me with faith you'd collaborate after accreditation, either. You're asking us to put our project's name against you, but not actually do any work here in return. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:04, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Four different Wikinewsies speak with one voice, here; try writing some news and we'll roll from there. Yet, this user's only edits have been to seek accreditation. Months have passed. Drawing this out any longer would be a waste of time. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 04:25, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Gthuman123 (talk)

Name: P H Doyle

Location: Topeka, Kansas, United States

Areas of interest: Engineering, Busniess, Government

Reason: Inverviews

Accomplishments: Doyle v Transunion

Contact information: Patrick_h_doyle@yahoo.com

User ID: Gthuman123

Applied on: 16:37, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Getting accreditation is something of a 'big deal', and I don't think 2 edits would do. Leaderboard (talk) 16:45, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

• Yeah, there honestly isn't a basis here to support accreditation; no content edits here, no activity at all anywhere else on the sisterhood. We're certainly interested to help out a newcomer to Wikinews (just, accreditation isn't appropriate at this stage). --Pi zero (talk) 23:45, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
• Hello Gthuman123! Thanks for applying for accreditation. What interviews would you like to do? --Gryllida (talk) 22:41, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
• Response to Gryllida: Election issues currently. Banking in the near future.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gthuman123 (talk • contribs)

Well, the best way for you, @Gthuman123: would be to start writing regularly--the best way to learn about the project policies and philosophies, as well as to earn the reputation that one needs to get to any higher post. On a side note, as why this request is self-explanatory for why a lot of work is to be done: things should be understood by global audience; and "Topeka, KS" highlights that point. (Who was that veteran Wikinewsie who would say, "You are not in Kansas anymore"?)
103.254.128.86 (talk) 15:50, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Failed. The community did not support this request. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 03:57, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Bubba73 (talk)

Name: Jud McCranie

Location: Brunswick, Georgia, US

Areas of interest: Now mostly photographing historic buildings, especially on the NRHP

Reason: I often am approached by people wondering what I'm doing - sometimes police or security people. I'd like to have photographer credentials. An additional reason is that I often have to shoot a house from a long distance away, through trees, because I don't feel comfortable going up to the house to ask for permission. Credentials would help.

Accomplishments: Many edits to the English Wikipedia (76,000 in 12 years) and many photos uploaded, and a very large number of photos uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Autopatrolled with rollback permission.

Contact information: j.mccranie comcast ● net

User ID: 218586 Bubba73 (across wiki projects)

Applied on: 05:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Comments

• Comment Now that you have mentioned "I often have to shoot a house from a long distance away, through trees, because I don't feel comfortable going up to the house to ask for permission.", Wikinews is not a medium to get away with photographing something or someone who were not permitting you to take photographs before. I don't know how it will help make you feel better taking the photos if you were never comfortable with it. It is possible accreditation might help, but it is more about photography ethics here, I feel. And at least for Wikinews, you must have their permission to interview and photograph, and disclose that you are going to report on Wikinews. I didn't know this when I first did it.
  acagastya 05:54, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Reply - I have never felt comfortable about walking up to a house and asking if I can take photos. Some people on the Wikipedia NRHP (National Register of Historic Places) project suggest that I do that (they have done it). I would feel more comfortable about doing that if I had some credientials on me. Bubba73 (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

That is the question of personal ethics. Besides, it will be good to point out how you are going to contribute to Wikinews if you want accreditation from Wikinews. Anyone can upload files on Commons. Most of the users that I know, or have met, or saw the userpage never hinted about working for this project. I think Commons should hand out accreditation for photographers who are going to contribute photos only.
acagastya 05:15, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I wish Commons would do that, but they don't, as far as I know. Bubba73 (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• • Reply Here is an example of where I could have gotten a better photo of a house if I had felt comfortable walking up and asking. Bubba73 (talk) 04:26, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• Comment OK, tell you what: point us to some of your images at Commons.....how about that as a starting point? I think I get what you're going for here and that's no crime. We just have A LOT OF PEOPLE who breeze in here (with no efforts to establish their credibility -- as a person/journalist/or whatever -- and ask us to accredit them just-like-that. So, you can respect that we're a wee bit gun shy about that sometimes? --Bddpaux (talk) 17:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

• • Reply This is a link to my uploads to Wikimedia Commons. A few of them are from recent events but the bulk of them are photos of historic buildings, almost all on the NRHP. I have 3,773 pages on my watchlist on Commons - almost all of them are photos. Some are ones that I improved with photoshop or from NASA, but the great majority are ones I've taken (must be well over 3,000 of them). Before 2010 I uploaded to en.wikipedia and a number of them have been transferred to commons. Bubba73 (talk) 04:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• Comment When we photograph, we have a reason to. There is something we want to tell others, depict something which would be impossible to put up in the words, or provide some information (...and all of the photography philosophy). As far as that house is concerned, it can be useful for a news article if something happens in that house. But if you had a good reason to take that photo, you should go and take the photo, and if somebody questions, tell them, "Madam/Sir, I was taking pictures of the house because whatever your reason may be, tell them honestly. I hope you do not mind. But if you do, I will delete the photos." And you must delete it because this is the question of ethics.
  acagastya 05:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• • That house is noteworthy because it is on th NRHP, but not in the news. Some people like to see architectural details, which I can't get from that distance. And yes, I'm too shy to just walk up and known on the door. And, for instance, a month or two ago I was walking down the street photographing the NRHP Twin Cities Historic District and someone came up to me and asked was I was doing. I said that I was taking pictures. They asked "what for?"
  • Sometimes historical buildings get destroyed and that makes the news. For instance, I had before and after photos here of a historical building being destroyed (it was in the local news). (Some of the other "places in peril" photos on that page are mine, too.) Bubba73 (talk) 14:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

• I did a search on Wikinews for Brunswick, Georgia and Glynn County, Georgia and there isn't much news here that makes it to Wikinews. But if someone wanted a photo of a news event here, or pretty close to here, I could go get it. Bubba73 (talk) 14:45, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

A couple of things: First; when I was taking photos of ATMs when I was writing this story India discontinues ₹500, ₹1000 denominations; releases ₹2000 and new ₹500 bills, security guard asked me why I was taking photos in Kannada. I tried to explain him that it was for news and he said I am not supposed to. It is possible that they said no for security reason, but I was a) not in a position to explain them what is Freedom of Panorama because of the language barrier and b) not accredited. You are in a better position than this. And Second; even if you have accreditation, people reserve the right to question you, say no to you or even tell a police official. You can tell about Freedom of Panorama and the police might help you there, but the accreditation would not stop others from questioning you.

As far a historically significant buildings are concerned, I don't think it should be a problem since you can always say: "I want a photo of this historical architecture."
acagastya 09:29, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

• Well, you've certainly contribute A LOT OF IMAGES at Commons, that's for sure. (A little aside here: I've gotten a lot of mileage simply saying, 'I'm a reporter working on a news story.') Non-Americans bring an interesting angle, because 'accredited' means a lot outside of the old US of A.......us, with our Freedom of the Press thing, and all.....but I digress. Well, at least we know you've cranked out a lot of output! Do you imagine yourself writing here much? --Bddpaux (talk) 21:14, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Ummmmmm, an answer to my question might be nice. --Bddpaux (talk) 22:16, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, but I didn't know that I had a message. No, I don't expect to write for WikiNews - there usually isn't much news other than local news here in Brunswick, Georgia. The Savannah and Jacksonville (exp Jax) newspapers cover some local news, and sometimes the Savannah and Jacksonville TV stations have something. The last big news here was the hurricane last fall, and it didn't hit us hard. Bubba73 (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

I encourage you to consider online original reporting or over the phone: email people and give phone calls to find information which is not currently available online. This is one quite useful form of original reporting. I myself did this to retrieve weather data to support claims with plots, and to query researchers about their research background and methodology. It works and with accreditation with the wikinewsie.org email address people seem more responsive! Original reporting does not have to be in person.

I am hoping that for your current activity the comment by SVTCobra above is useful. Cheers, --Gryllida (chat) 04:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

• Comment - It looks like I'm not going to get the pass, probably mainly because I only want to take photos and not contribute news items. There was a case a few months ago when I could have used it, though. I had tickets for a concert. I knew that cameras were not allowed inside, but I wanted to take a photo of the venue before I went in. I took a photo. Two security people came over and asked if I had credentials. Of course I don't. They said that I could not take photos of security (the security people checking the concert goers). I didn't want a hassle that would prevent me from seeing the concert, so I brought the photo up on my camera and showed them that I was deleting it. However, my camera has two cards, with photos going to both, and the delete button only removes it from the first card, so I still had the photo. I cropped it to take out the security people and uploaded it to commons: File:St. Augustine Amphitheatre, St. Augustine, Florida, U.S.jpg. Bubba73 (talk) 07:29, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the follow-up Bubba73. I would suggest to write several news stories and re-apply then -- writing "based on existing online sources" is a good exercise to practice the pillars, so that you know what notes are important to take for your original report. After gaining such practice, I personally encourage you to re-apply to accreditation indicating what kind of local events you would like to attend and report on in the future. --Gryllida (talk) 07:58, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Votes

Support You, my friend put your WORK where your mouth is! If ever there's been a person worthy of accreditation for photographic submissions to Commons, it'd be you! --Bddpaux (talk) 21:38, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bddpaux: I don't think handing out accreditation for anyone with a camera is a good idea. They should have a history of contribution, and establish a trust before they can shield themselves with a press pass.
acagastya PING ME! 16:07, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, let me offer a few comments here. Yes, accreditation is about trust. Yes, its a serious thing and should be treated as such. We here at English WN are 'vouching' for that person and their credibility as a contributor. I own a camera and I'd bet you do too. LOADS AND LOADS of people come here, hang about for 6 minutes, then ask for accreditation. (You weren't one of them.) When they don't get it, they often tantrum and run away mad! Now, you use the term 'shield themselves'. I know that, in various parts of the world, the term 'Press Credentials' means different things and that's fine. I can walk out on a nearby sidewalk and do 85% of EVERYTHING a reporter with the Dallas Morning News can do right this second. It's not always like that in certain countries and I'm aware of that....okey-dokey....fine. This guy, though.....asked for it....and then HAS CONTINUED TO PHOTOGRAPH many historical homes in his geographic area. To also split some VERY fine hairs, each of us are still (technically) operating as "independent" journalists......even if we are 'accredited' here! The Wikimedia Foundation doesn't buy insurance for us. I'd be willing to bet if we were sued in light of a story, we wouldn't be able to get ANY of their lawyers to call us back! This guy is a WORKER.....go check out his stuff over at Commons. He's pretty much said he's not a writer....and that's fine....it is. But we've had enough TALKERS around here (no, I'm not insulting you, I promise I'm not).....we've had a devoted person come here, tell us he's a DOER and has followed thru on that promise. I'm good with the guy all the way around. We are currently vetting you as a reporter here (noticed I voted support). You've done what you said you'd do. Journalism isn't always 'clean' or 'pretty' or 'easy', but we're all (the few of us, I mean) in this together and I feel like the guy is legit. --Bddpaux (talk) 21:42, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bddpaux: For the part "This guy is a WORKER [...] He's pretty much said he's not a writer" -- it is okay if they don't write articles. However, there is photo essay which they could do. Looking at the bigger picture, accreditation is not a way to get free passes to XYZ. If we use tell someone that we are accredited and wish to cover/report something, that is the real use of accreditation. And then there are journalistic ethics one needs to take care of. There are two school of thoughts when it comes to photography. A) Ask for permission. B) Don't wait for "the perfect moment". Until and unless it is not a sting operation, we must ask permission to photograph. When I attended Comic Con, before every single photo, I asked for the permission -- more than 200 times in the whole day. For the minors, I asked their legal guardians. However, I noticed some people who had media accreditation, did not ask for consent for cosplayers and took the photo. Bangalore ComicCon clearly stated that Cosplay is not consent and one must ask for permission -- those "professional" journalists were careless enough to violate the ethics. If this user gets accreditation, I would expect them to keep up with it (not that I am questioning about how they do -- besides they even spoke about it); and I would expect a photo essay when they get access to something which was possible just because of the accreditation. [FWIW -- I do not have my own camera, and I had not touched a camera for more than twelve months, before I went to Bangalore comic con.]
•–• 08:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

and before we get too deep here: 'We must ask permission to photograph'....um, yeah.....maybe and maybe not. I live in the US of A. When I attend (local) conventions/Maker Faires etc. there is a HUGE DISCLAIMER at the entrance telling people that just by entering, they're consenting to be photographed. We can chatter on adding all manner of bloviate to this topic all day, but the issue is: do we accredit the guy or don't we? --Bddpaux (talk) 17:03, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I really have no desire or motivation to argue anything you're saying here. It's all fundamentally correct...but to what end? Based upon all this...I think we owe the guy a decision in-the-least. --Bddpaux (talk) 22:35, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Regarding consent, per photography ethics, we must ask for consent. Other thing is: consent to be photograph is not same as granting permission to be uploaded on the internet. Besides, we are also allowing anyone to use the photo, modify it, make money -- people did not sign up for it. That is the reason I decided to release my photos of ComicCon under ND license -- next time, I guess I would choose to use NC-ND because people did not sign up for them becoming face of a brand.
•–• 18:08, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

OK, once again.....lets bring this long winded discussion back to our world here at Wikinews. Look at the policy on Accreditation. Please point out for me this 'photography ethics' policy. Sure, I'd bet you could find it in a college journalism text book.....fine. But this project (and the Wikimedia Foundation) have policies. Yes, Commons license(s) have some parameters about who can be photographed etc. .....all that is fine and great. I want anyone accredited by us to play by the rules.....super terrific! To loop back around here: I can't find any evidence that the guy has done anything bad/wrong/incorrect or whatever. In the end: just decide which way you want to vote and go that way, OK? It's time to make a decision......heck, the guy has probably vanished by now. --Bddpaux (talk) 23:40, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

There is no mention of journalistic ethics on the policy pages. I could have lied and could have told the reviewer almost anything when I interviewed a shopkeeper who answered in Kannada [I bet you did not get a word of it]. Not everything is said, nor it has to be. Let's not get down to discussing what is missing from the project space pages. Accreditation is not only for photographing things or people, you know better than me. Things are pretty straightforward; if one has not contributed on this project, I am not going to say "yes". I know people who are good at photography, but do not follow photography ethics, let alone journalistic ethics. If they start uploading photos on Commons and ask for the rights on Wikinews, I would not be okay with that. We are supposed to tell the person whom we are going to photograph that their photograph would be uploaded on Wikinews, and if possible, we should explain them about the license we wish to use. Let me ask you one thing: do you agree consent of photograph does not mean the photographer can upload the photo anywhere?

Wikinews' reputation is at stake when the reporter does something problematic. And without knowing the basic journalism ethics, (which took me time to learn because of the time I spent on Wikinews) it is wrong. Think about this situation -- I tell someone I am from Wikinews, can I have a photo of yours? or I am taking someone's photo without permission, and if they question me, I say, Oh, I am from Wikinews but I never upload those photos for Wikinews' use. I end up selling those photos somewhere else [play all the permutations in your head with on what type of websites]. Think about the situation when that person comes to know their photos were used for a different purpose, and not what they had permitted to. When one contributes to the project, they would generally think good of the project and not indulge in any wrongdoings. I found out I can get free entry for ComicCon events if I ask for media accreditation, and I can just say I am from Wikinews, and avoid paying money for tickets. But I would not do that because I understand the ethics involved. Without actual contribution on the project, I can not trust anyone -- we have dealt with a lot of noobs, some learns from failure, some would go berserk. You never know what kind of editors they are, until they stay on the project of long enough. Speaking of the time, well, I had to wait for longer duration than this user had to (243 days in my case, 241, for this user's case) even though I had written about 250 news articles by then. Until I do not see contribution from this user on the project, let it be a photo essay, if they are not a writer, I am not saying a "yes".

Note: I am not accusing this user for the various scenarios I was discussing.
•–• 07:47, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Not a terrible argument at all. --Bddpaux (talk) 22:45, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

I think I would agree with Acagastya on this. Bubba73 is a major contributor to English Wikipedia and to Commons but their entire contribution to Wikinews is centred on this request page. I could list a bunch of things I do on other WM projects (see my userpage if you really want to find out), but they shouldn't have a bearing on a request like this. I may have misunderstood the initial reasoning but I can't see a difficulty in obtaining photos of historic buildings. As far as I know, in the US, you don't need permission to take photos of things that are viewable from a public place (apart from obvious cases like photographing through an open window or door). Particularly if the building is historic, I am sure that the owners will be aware that other people might be interested in their property. The major objection (at least as far as Wikimedia is concerned) is of course the publication of photos of copyright scultpures and other artworks in public places, but that is a different issue. Green Giant (talk) 15:01, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Oppose for now. I will support once there is a significant corpus of Bubba73's work here. Green Giant (talk) 15:01, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

not to forget FoP in the US.
223.237.228.203 (talk) 15:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Cheers. I added a link to the Commons page on this issue. Green Giant (talk) 15:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Oppose I suggest user:Bubba73 read w:Wikipedia:Press pass. Wikinews does not issue press credentials/passes for activities that are not related to news gathering. It is quite frankly unethical to present credentials as a news journalist, if ones activity is not for news purposes. --SVTCobra 18:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Oppose Apart from some concerns about Bubba's answers to questions, it's simply a fact that he has never contributed anything here (https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Bubba73) and doesn't even promise that. This brazen request for undeserved credentials should have been closed with a negative vote a year ago, imho. Gray62 (talk) 08:41, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Closed as successful. Restoration of voluntarily resigned status. Open for several months, and has picked up three supporting votes from established Wikinewsies, no objections. The original application for accreditation garnered more votes. --Pi zero (talk) 18:11, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

acagastya

Name: Agastya Chandrakant

Location: Mysore, India

Areas of interest: Sports, Science and technology, Crime and law, Politics and conflicts, ... basically, almost everything, honestly.

Reason: To be able to conduct formal interviews, and cover some local news.

Accomplishments: I have six ORs including one photoessay with two interviews, and created 278 news articles which were published.

Contact information: acagastya outlook ● com

User ID: 1526439

Applied on: 17:09, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Comments

• Reapplication after resigning rights across-the-board. --Pi zero (talk) 14:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
• Suggest a different naming convention for this second request; implementing, tentatively. --Pi zero (talk) 14:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Votes

• Support As with reviewer rights, which were regranted, I'm okay restoring this. One such incident doesn't unduly bother me. --Pi zero (talk) 14:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
• Support --SVTCobra 15:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
• Support per the previous work done including reporting from WikiCon. Green Giant (talk) 16:45, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Close as unsuccessful. User withdrew nomination. --SVTCobra 11:37, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Lhcollins (talk)

Name: Lhcollins

Location: Maryland, New Jersey, & Pennsylvania, USA

Areas of interest: Emerging musical acts and the venues that support them. Other interests include Psychology and environmental issues.

Reason: To give me the access I need to contribute to Wikinews, Wikimedia Commons, and Wikipedia more effectively.

Accomplishments: Regarding venues, The Ottobar, Lucerna Music Bar, The Upstage Club, The Saint (music venue), Asbury Park Music Awards and numerous fixes to articles about other small venues (e.g., The Stone Pony, Hammerjacks, The Recher Theater). In terms of emerging artists (and one DJ), Charlie Mars, The Ries Brothers, Deal Casino, Aaron Lee Tasjan, Emily Grove, Holme (band), The Blind Owl Band, and Jeff Raspe. In real life I am a psychology professor whose hobbies include construction, home renovation, photography, web design, digital art, technology. I am a published author.

Here are the photographs I have contributed to Wikimedia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lhcollins

Contact information: lc chwd1 ● com

User ID:

Applied on: 13:48, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

I would also like to be able to apply for press passes. They require a letter from my editor. How is that handled? Thank you for your help.

Comments

You have never contributed to English Wikinews. Just because you wish to help Wikipedia and Commons (and hopefully this project too), we can not grant accreditation. You need to establish yourself as a trustworthy editor. Wikinews is not a place where one can get free press passes, you need to earn it.
acagastya PING ME! 16:04, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

• It would have been more appropriate for me to ask for credentials from Wikipedia or Wikimedia since I already have a long history of contributions as a trustworthy editor with them (Wikimedia Commons & Wikipedia contributions for the music world alone), but I couldn't figure out what their process was to get press credentials, or even if there is one. Thanks anyway. You just saved me a lot of money! :-) Lhcollins (talk) 14:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Votes

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Closed as successful. --Pi zero (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Acagastya

Name: Agastya Chandrakant

Location: Mysore, India

Areas of interest: Sports, Science and technology, Crime and law, Politics and conflicts, ... basically, almost everything, honestly.

Reason: To be able to conduct formal interviews, and cover some local news.

Accomplishments: I have four ORs, and created over 150 news articles which were published.

Contact information: acagastya outlook ● com

User ID: 1526439

Applied on: 21:27, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Comments

• Hi Acagastya, I am glad that you are volunteering to be a reporter. Please answer several questions inline. :) --Gryllida (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Local original reporting in person is perhaps best done with one person doing the photography and another taking notes. Do you have a peer who would be willing to help? --Gryllida (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • What news or events are of interest for you to attend in the future? (Some reporters are known to use their accreditation to enter parliament or sports events or competitions in the past; it would be interesting to know which ones you would be targeting.) --Gryllida (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Have you performed any interviews before (perhaps by passing them to an existing Wikinewsie reporter if the interview target is not responsive)? I recall a controversial topic on the Chinese Traditional Medicine; while I quite liked it and the enthusiasm, it seemed too challenging to cover in a relevant neutral way. Have we got anything else as an example? --Gryllida (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

@Gryllida:

• About photography, I do not have any peer to help me photograph, and even if I had, I would not want to. There is a reason behind this. The peer will be the author of those photos. Those photos should be licensed under a Creative Commons license. I have tried to explain my friends about CC license many times, and every single time, 1) they would not understand 2) are not willing to listen and understand the license 3) are bored 4) have a problem with commercial use term. I am interested in photography, and I believe I can manage taking photos and notes, though it will not be easy, but it is better to obtain photos under CC license that the author allowing the photos to be released under CC license just because he or she wants me to stop telling about the terms of the license. (Just in case if anyone wants to see some of my photographs, visit this link; but I do not shoot humans frequently)
• I have covered almost every kind of (sports, politics and conflicts, science and technology, disasters and accidents, obituaries, culture and entertainment, crime and law ...). But my ORs were focused on politics and conflicts and crime and law. In India, I will get opportunity to cover articles on crime and law and politics and conflicts more than any other category, which becomes my primary focus. I would be happy to cover other events from the other category as well, if I get an opportunity.
• Yes, I have interviewed few civilians for my ORs. I recorded an interview (for India discontinues ₹500, ₹1000 denominations; releases ₹2000 and new ₹500 bills) and sent to scoop and Pi zero. Another interview was for Magnitude 7.5 earthquake hits Afghanistan, I left the notes on the talk page of the article.
  acagastya 21:30, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the answers. One more question, what would you use accreditation for, if approved? What kind of events would you primarily target? --Gryllida (talk) 23:12, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

@Gryllida: As I said, I would be happy to cover events from various category, but, Crime & law and Politics & conflicts will be my primary target, as that is the easiest one to find and follow. (And about the licensing, they are impatient, and would not listen after a while. If someone approaches me to know about it, I will explain them, but it is clear that it is pointless to explain to everyone. After all, the don't know what is copyrighted, what accounts for copyright violation and what is fair use or commercial use. They think photography starts and ends with someone seeing a subject and pressing the button and don't want to know anything more than that for a simple task like photography.)
acagastya 12:45, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Having picked a theme to focus on has an advantage: that particular thing is exposed in depth, continuously, which helps to gather a group of people around it who read the news and help to report them.

"Crime & law and Politics & conflicts" is OK as the theme. Please keep it up. :-)

Is it in a particular geographical area or internationally? --Gryllida (talk) 02:01, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Gryllida: I would not be going abroad anytime soon. So, it will India. Since my college is in a different state and my home is in other state, It depends where I am. I can't specify a particular geographic area. But the primary target is Crime & law and Politics & conflicts in India, let it be central or state level.
acagastya 05:46, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

• Question User:Acagastya Our page WN:OR has some small discussion of identifying oneself as a reporter when asking questions. I seem to recall this issue came up with regard to some reportage you were doing a while ago. What are your thoughts on the legal and ethical considerations involved? --Pi zero (talk) 17:18, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

@Pi zero: I believe the article you are thinking about is India discontinues ₹500, ₹1000 denominations; releases ₹2000 and new ₹500 bills. If you remember, not only the story was getting stale (since I decided to write about US presidential election), there was a language barrier -- I could understand Kannada, but not speak it. That was the reason it slipped out of my mind that I should disclose I am asking for Wikinews. However, while writing, I remember asking you (on IRC) how I should present the information and I informed you that I could not tell them I was asking for Wikinews.

Legal and ethical considerations -- it seems likely that one should disclose they are doing this for a news org, however, there are cases when journalists need to go under cover. [We even had an article where journalists carry a sting operation going under cover -- that was for Sam Allardyce article.] Similarly, when I was watching Batman v Superman, Bruce Wayne says something, and asks not to quote him. Let's change the scenario, where a country's leader was caught accepting that they did something terribly incorrect [think about any worst case situation, I don't want to create any hypothetical scenario now] -- if they ask us not to report it -- what will we do? We are not priests that we have to keep mum for a confession. On your talk page, there is a quote which says something like "Journalism is printing [publishing] what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations." PR might be an important thing, but telling the truth, publishing the facts -- that is the most important thing. One should reveal the information of their org, but if the situation demands -- which I do not think would arise in the near future, one has to go undercover. "Sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic archdiocese of Boston" might not be the best example, but it is no secret that going undercover [which I presume is not so common] can yield dark facts. FWIW, I can not make any scenario where I would have to keep my identity hidden, so I would disclose my relations with Wikinews for ORs.
•–• 18:06, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Votes

• Support I see no problem here. (And please keep trying to explain licensing to a friend slowly, it's a challenging task :-).) --Gryllida (talk) 23:11, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
• Support I think you've tried to hang around here and help out quite a bit! Journalism (and people's perception of it) requires a lot of patience and tenacity! --Bddpaux (talk) 17:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
• Support -- numbermaniac 08:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
• Support --Pi zero (talk) 18:20, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
• Support Has a clear use case for benefiting from accreditation and is experienced with the project. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:48, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Closed as successful. Following close questions asked, veteran Wikinewsies supported and none opposed; community response to the nomination clearly positive. --Pi zero (talk) 12:58, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Dennis Bratland (talk)

Name: Dennis Bratland

Location: Seattle, Washington

Areas of interest: News and event photography, photos for Wikipedia biographies, National Register of Historic Places and other historic or significant places. Wikipedia article writing on motorcycles, photography, Seattle, Washington, and various topics.

Reason: Press credentials for improved access to special events, e.g. semi-annual Ballard Locks inspection

Accomplishments: Editor since 2004, 39,890 Wikipedia edits, 2 Good Articles, 28 DYKs. Many of my photos have been used by news media and blogs off Wikipedia. Photos: File:Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn at the Ballard Neighborhood Greenway Celebration.jpg, File:Carson Ellis and Colin Meloy signing Wildwood in Portland.jpg, File:Leaving courthouse on first day of gay marriage in Washington.JPG, File:David L. Hough at 2009 Seattle International Motorcycle Show.jpg, File:Leaving Seattle City Hall on first day of gay marriage in Washington.jpg, File:Ballard Locks cleaning 2012-03-16 01.jpg, File:Caitlin Doughty University Bookstore 2014-09-18 2.JPG

Contact information: dennis.bratland gmail ● com

User ID: Dennis Bratland

Applied on: 01:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• While we certainly do not require a Wikinews-accredited reporter do their primary wikimedian contribution to Wikinews, we do want someone who has shown willing and able to do some Wikinews writing, and demonstrated some regard for Wikinews. Accreditation is the Wikinews community vouching for the reporter, after all, and we need both to know how that person will conduct themself as our representative to the world and — realistically — what we get in return. Your writing credentials are on Wikipedia; writing for Wikinews is a very different experience — different writing styles, here there is a deadline, even our notion of neutrality is different (articles on each project can look non-neutral when seen through the lens of the other project's policies).

  Some pages you may find useful reading: Wikinews:For Wikipedians;  WN:Pillars of Wikinews writing;  WN:Writing a Photo essay. --Pi zero (talk) 19:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

  • I'm not a Wikinewsie, but as an outsider I find this an interesting question. When the creation of Wikinews was first debated, it seemed to me that there was a definite understanding that Wikinews wouldn't try to claim a monopoly on writing about current events—this being one of the chief concerns raised against it. Wikinews supporters argued that the opposite would be true, and the project would in fact support the other projects with all of the great material gained through better access. The "what [do] we get in return" argument is therefore a bit offputting to me, I have to admit. Since this person I don't know (but whose credentials as a Wikimedia contributor appear pretty solid) wants to contribute the other way around, uploading media of current events for the benefit of this project among others, I don't really see how deadlines and NPOV policy differences are factors as important as you make them (bold, italicized) in your comment. But—and please believe me when I say that I don't mean this sarcastically—were he to take a break from working toward his soon-approaching 40,000th Wikipedia edit, what would a reasonable number of Wikinews articles be for him to write? Austin (talk) 21:59, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Austin: This isn't about other projects covering current events; that's an entirely orthogonal issue. By accrediting someone, Wikinews is putting its own reputation at risk, and thereby its own ability to cover things. It's only fair for us to want to have some confidence in how that person will behave. If they don't care about Wikinews, they're definitely not a good risk, because they don't care whether they make Wikinews look bad. If they use Wikinews accreditation to gain access, then what they do with that access reflects on Wikinews, not just on whatever project they use the access for. By not conducting themselves with journalistic integrity they can do damage to Wikinewsies' ability to cover stories. On the other hand, if they use our accreditation to gain access and then comport themselves well, they can add to our reputation even if they don't contribute to Wikinews — but that's a delicate balance, because if they care about Wikinews enough to protect our reputation, why wouldn't they contribute some of the fruits of their labor to Wikinews? --Pi zero (talk) 23:03, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

• • • I have neither the energy nor the desire to wade off too deeply into this, but this has been a long-running issue for us here. Wikinews is about news. When one asks for accreditation, they're asking us to vouch for them as a JOURNALIST who understands the fundamentals of journalistic integrity. No one (that I'm aware of) has ever claimed that we have any type of monopoly on current events. Someone can post a perfectly formidable article at WP on an event that occurred one hour ago, so long as it's properly sourced -- and the same applies for us here. There're just a few niggly differences between how we dip into sources, compared to how an encyclopedic article might do that. The bloke is probably a perfectly legit stand-up kinda guy, we just need to see some indication that'll he'll play nicely with others and will contribute here in a nice way. This project requires a VERY HIGH level of humility....and you can't take things personally. --Bddpaux (talk) 23:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

• Comment Wikinews policy at Wikinews:Accreditation policy seems to be clear that intention to contribute to the Wikinews platform is not a prerequisite for getting Wikinews accreditation. Is this user being judged on the basis of his intention to contribute to Wikinews? Is it policy to give the accreditation to people with no intention at all to contribute to Wikinews?

This person raised the issue on a Wikimedia mailing list. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Probably it is better to discuss this part at Wikinews_talk:Accreditation_requests#Accreditation_for_Wikimedia_contributor. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I had hoped for some of the following reactions to my comments:

• attempt to justify expectation that the candidate would conduct themself with journalistic integrity, by means other than Wikinews contribution, along with explanation of why this expectation is consistent with absence of Wikinews contribution, and perhaps some justification of why contributing to Wikinews would be somehow an undue burden.
• attempt to contribute to Wikinews (which frankly should not be all that difficult for a wikimedian photographer in good standing who starts by talking to us and learning how it's done).

Instead I perceive I'm being accused of exclusionism, which frankly I think is an unjustified accusation. From the first sentence I wrote here: "we certainly do not require a Wikinews-accredited reporter do their primary wikimedian contribution to Wikinews". I did not write those words casually. I meant them. I'll go further, and explicitly say that I believe Wikinews is happy to provide accreditation to persons who expect to almost never contribute to Wikinews. The accreditation being requested is for journalism, by Wikinews. I think it's only common sense to ask someone who wishes to be accredited by Wikinews to do some contribution to Wikinews as a preliminary to accreditation. --Pi zero (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Pi zero: I have no opinion about English Wikinews policy. The only opinion that I have is that press accreditation is useful in the context of the Wikimedia movement beyond English Wikinews. The English Wikinews community is among the smaller demographics which has a use for Wiki press accreditation. Probably the biggest need is at Wikimedia Commons, because photography goes there and because it is international in scope. Wikipedias in every language also have a need for press accreditation. I contribute to English Wikipedia and sometimes use the name of the magazine for which I work to get press entry to events, and it helps sometimes.

I am not accusing anyone here of anything. I am seeking information about consensus and best practice.

You say accreditation is offered to people who "almost never" contribute to Wikinews. What about to people who will never contribute to English Wikinews? I have no opinion about what is common sense - I am seeking an outlet for press accreditation for the Wikimedia community. If English Wikinews is that outlet, then great, and if not, then that is great too because it means that Wikimedians wanting accreditation should go somewhere else. I am asking what the community here wants. If English Wikinews were the hub for Wikimedia movement press accreditation, then that means that the entire Wikimedia community would converge here to go through the process, and maybe a small percentage of them would stay around and contribute. If there are barriers to this, and if the English Wikinews community prefers to preferentially accredit contributors who intend to make at least one contribution to English Wikinews, then I want to check options for assigning Wikimedia press passes somewhere else for people who either do not want to contribute to English Wikinews.

It is reasonable for you to ask for people endorsed by English Wikinews to attempt to contribute to this project. Likewise, I hope you think that it is reasonable to say that the Wikimedia community should go somewhere else if they need press accreditation for another Wikimedia project if that accreditation is not offered here. Because the English Wikinews press accreditation process is most developed in all Wikimedia projects so far as I know, though, I think it would be best to ask the community here what they want to happen. Perhaps people here would prefer to be more open just so that more attention and traffic can come through this project, or on the contrary, perhaps the community here agrees that remaining more exclusive is better for the brand name here and that sending non-participants elsewhere is best.

Thoughts? What do you want to happen here for people who expressly say that they will not contribute to English Wikinews? Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: I agree that press credentials are of value for Commons as well as for Wikinews. (Whether it's relevant to Wikipedia is another question; Wikipedia makes a big deal out not allowing original research... but Wikipedian policy hypocrisy is a whole other can of worms.) I can tell you that press credentials is a difficult problem, and if you want to know about its challenges, Wikinews is the place to ask because we're the ones who have been struggling with it for years. In particular I recommend you would do well to speak to Brian McNeil. --Pi zero (talk) 16:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• The number of photos I have of public events, such as the Mayor's ribbon cutting, the city council inauguration, the Wildwood book signing, the first same sex marriages at Seattle City Hall, etc., as linked to above, is evidence that I have been able to go out to an event and return with a photograph without besmirching the reputation of Wikimedia. At Caitlin Doughty's book signing, I didn't manage to get very good photos but I introduced myself to her and explained what Wikipedia needed for an author bio photo, so she released a head shot CC-by-SA via an OTRS ticket. So I can intereact with real humans in a way that benefits Wikimedia. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, there's been a lot of interesting dialogue brought up here and I think some important things have been discussed (although, maybe not properly resolved, but let's not slip down that slippery slope!) Let me ask you this, then: Noone is saying you have to contribute articles here to become accredited by us as a reporter, BUT would you be willing to commit to maintaining dialogue with some of our reporters here to keep them abreast of some of the photos you have taken/will be taking?? That way, we can boost our cooperation level in a way that one hand is washing the other, so-to-speak. That way, you can sort of function as a 'staff photographer' and our writers can benefit from your work. What do you think?? --Bddpaux (talk) 18:53, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes indeed, that's something I can realistically commit to. And requests to document upcoming events or to provide background photos for stories are welcome. Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:01, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

• Per talk page request, this search has photos I've done this year -- the top 60 or so are 2015. The exceptions are the ones without the edit summary User created page with UploadWizard. If it instead says something like {{Information |Description=Bellingham, Washington protest against Arctic drilling. See w:Seattle Arctic drilling protests |Source=[https://www.flickr.com/photos/theslowlane/17836715269/ " then it's just a file I transferred from Flickr. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:20, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• Comment What do you expect from Wikinews accreditation?

I do not mean in-terms of what content you expect to contribute — wherever such may prove of most-use — I refer to in-terms of what additional recognition, or credibility, you expect this to provide.

I've looked at your photos, they're certainly well-worth looking to get for use across all projects. What I'd add to, try and encourage an interest in contributing here, is that we allow images which might otherwise be deleted from Commons. Examples would be The EU Parliament in Strasbourg, or images where in-copyright artworks might be considered unacceptable. (Easiest to cite my own work, I can find examples thereof instantly as-compared to other people's work). Further to that, our presence over on Facebook is likely to exceed 90,000 by month-end, that's quite an organisational reach for such a small project; Wikivoyage, Wiktionary, and Commons, combined don't even come close to an order of magnitude less reach.

I'd like to address some of the other comments over on the (now-{{flag}}ged) discussion page, but not right now. I've been off-project for a considerable time due to utterly despairing over the WMF rejecting FDC recommendations to fund a workable accreditation programme, and a variety of — some quite serious — health problems. I need to ease myself back into on-project work over the Festive season, and properly plan the long wished-for migration of wikinewsie.org services to Iceland so we can finally take advantage of the IMMI.

I am inclined, on the basis of discussion here and supporting votes, to weak support. It's long past-due for the Wikinews vs Wikipedia hatchet to be buried. I know this is a somewhat old discussion now, but seeing the FDC actually "grow some" and be highly critical of the WMF itself gives me a glimmer of hope the community can take some of the power back from the Foundation. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

• Request close Shouldn't this be approved now? It's been here for 6 months. Thanks! --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

• I agree it should be closed, but am not happy to take that decision due to my patchy contribution level of late. I'd read the comments and votes as a pass, but I've a few concerns about what the consequences might be. Ideally, the WMF might take a few steps towards having an official programme — and put some of their mountain of cash into the liability insurance something like that needs. Don't think things have improved any in that regard since the departure of the prior CEO; or, one could uncharitably conclude they've got worse. (I'll keep my thoughts regarding Sue, formerly not at-all well-loved of CBC.ca, non-public thank you.)

So, someone else take the decision, please. Dennis assuming it's a passing close, prod me on my talk page for the @wikinewsie.org email address and a template for the biz cards we've used previously. Admittedly, that needs an update since the addition of Wikivoyage to the family. Beyond that? Well, the most help we can give is 'social engineering' by email to help you get better access.

Hopefully, when it does come to attending newsworthy events, you can drag along someone prepared to have a go at writing it up for here. Or, get access to events that can be done as photo essays. Just — please, assuming it's a passing close — don't publicise it on Commons/Wikipedia until you've a portfolio of photos in use here. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 20:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

And remember to contact me via Wikimail or Gmail if anyone wants me to photograph a news event around Seattle and Puget Sound. Accreditation or no, I'm always happy to respond to requests for photos, research, and other work as needed. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

• Offer greatly appreciated, Dennis. I actually have a couple of friends in the Seattle area I still keep in-touch with online. One takes a very close interest in local politics, and writes well. Could easily see him covering local elections, asking some very pointed questions, and providing a quality summary of goings-on which would benefit greatly from photos.

Do you do any audio/video work too? I ask since Andy Mabbett has a nice little project capturing audio of people for Wikipedia. I've also made use of video which resulted in something similar, thanks to a lot of help from Wikimedia Austria & Germany. Point is, there's a surprising scope for use of photographic and/or A/V work here. Plus, with local upload permitted — and the ability to assert Fair Use/Fair Dealing — we could probably help get you onto local museum and gallery press lists. Newsworthy (Wikinews) versus Notable (Wikipedia) are such wildly different yardsticks I suspect you'd be surprised what might pass publication criteria here. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 23:25, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

I can do audio and video if necessary, but I wouldn't claim to be particularly good at it. If nobody with an A/V aptitude is available, I could try and the results would probably be acceptable if the conditions aren't too challenging. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Votes

• Support Good photographers are in demand. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
• Support Photoessays on Wikinews are a fine tradition. Reading through the conversation above, the suggested arrangement Bddpaux suggests seems reasonable. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 12:44, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
• Support Haven't seen any reason to oppose while I was lurking. Reguyla (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support I'm supporting your request for one simple reason: you did what you said you'd do (you continued to put up content over at Commons)....which is commendable. --Bddpaux (talk) 21:46, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Unsuccessful; as this has been open a good long time, with 50% opposition from veteran Wikinewsies, it's not realistically going to turn into a positive decision. --Pi zero (talk) 18:27, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Hawkeye7 (talk)

Name: Ross Mallett

Location: Canberra, Australia

Areas of interest: Sports, Military, Australia

Reason: To facilitate ability to cover international sporting events, particular Paralympic events.

Accomplishments: I have nearly 60,000 edits of Wikimedia Projects, including 43 featured articles and nearly 200 good articles. I have written dozens of Wikinews articles including six featured news articles.

I have a previous, successful, request, which is archived here and an unsuccessful re-accreditation request here

Contact information: hawkeye7 gmail ● com

User ID: 180828

Applied on: 21:55, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• Question What do you believe has changed since your last request? --Pi zero (talk) 22:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

  Time has passed. People have moved on. I have demonstrated my good faith and good works. I meet all the stated requirements for accreditation in the Wikinews:Accreditation policy Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

  Rereading the discussion from your last application, I see a lot of disbelief of fault on your part. And now what you say is "People have moved on"? I read that as saying you hope the people who remember have left. The implication being that you see the failure of that application as being other people's fault rather than yours. --Pi zero (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

  You read it incorrectly. All I am saying is that I have demonstrated my good faith and good works. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• Comment It seems pertinent to note you seem to think not being ready to hand over accreditation is somehow equal to a complete community ban from editing. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 21:18, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
• CommentOK, I'm going to say a few things and then I'm going to render my vote. Several weeks back, you put this at PiZero's page, when he reminded you that you can submit here without accreditation: "I cannot. I must have accreditation to attend events. Without Wikinews accreditation, I have had to accept accreditation from another organisation. And that means I then cannot post to Wikinews at all." I weighed in (neutrally, mind you) on your last request for accreditation....I commented there (and many other places, at other times) that humility is held in high regard here. Over the past 15 months, you've made very few general edits, barely assisted with two specks of cleanup or anything of that ilk. OK...I won't prattle on down that lane too far, but it's still a fact.

So, true, ok....you can't prance around AS A JOURNALIST at public events in Australia without accreditation. Your quote: "I must have accreditation to attend events." No you don't. You must have accreditation to attend events as AN ACCREDITED JOURNALIST.....to wear your pretty little badge and sit in the media tent etc. etc. So, without all that: You attend an event. Bob and Bill are racing. Bob runs faster than Bill. Bill trips, falls gets hurt and bleeds. Bob wins. The crowd cheers, 'We still love you, Bill.' The medics run onto the field and attend to Bill. You happen to be sitting next to Bill's friend, whom you tell you're working on an article to post online about the race (you state this honestly to the friend). He says, with tears in his eyes, "Bill is the greatest bloke ever. He's worked so hard. I'm just gutted over this loss." You come here, write all that down and submit it. THAT'S JOURNALISM!!! Are you telling me, that in your country, if you did that, police would break down your door and haul you away to jail in the middle of the night?! I'm asking you, seriously...not rhetorically. You don't need accreditation to do that stuff....not here!!! This is CITIZEN JOURNALISM. Ok, so some countries won't give you a badge without a vouching organisation....I get that now (it took me a while to understand that). But I have read a few lines about laws in other countries....and people have blogs, they have Facebook pages etc. If you see/hear something, can't you use that in an article? People come here, seeking the glory but don't want to sacrifice their guts....and it's just annoying. (See, I went down that lane, even though I wasn't going to.) --Bddpaux (talk) 18:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

What a lovely surprise. People on Wikinews have never asked me about what I've been up to before. You brought up a lot of points. I wasn't able to post anything on Wikinews for a year. Which was a pity, because I had a lot of material that could have been used. I'm not an admin any more either, so there wasn't anything much I could do in that regard to help out. I'm a historian, not a journalist. However, if my accreditation is restored, I promise a good output. Where you can go and what you can do depends on the event in question. Australia is pretty good in that regard, we have broad freedom of panorama that extends to interiors, and you can wander around even major sporting events with a camera and take pictures. The real leg work is in building up a rapport with the players, coaches and officials. Having done that, a sporting organisation will usually issue a pass. Now it gets a bit more difficult when we move to the international arena. In many cases, I travel as a quasi-member of the Australian team. Take, for example, the recent trip to China. Which you can read about here. In this case, being with the team was the only way I was able to access the venue at all. However, once inside the compound, I was quite free to mingle with the athletes and officials and to take photographs, China being a country with robust freedom of panorama. There is more than just physical access though. There's broadband internet, there's the score sheets, and there's photocopiers, so you can take copies of documents the teams lend you. In China, there was a lot of trouble with the Great Firewall. Google, Facebook, Twitter were all out of bounds. Wikipedia worked though. For the 2014 Women's World Wheelchair Basketball Championship in Canada in 2014, I was able to secure media accreditation that gave me access to the media facilities. Unfortunately, they had me working flat out on Wikipedia, so I was only able to switch to Wikinews for the last couple of days. I spent my final day in Canada transcribing an interview for Wikinews. It takes roughly 20 times as long to transcribe an interview as it takes to write it up. Which brings me to the Big Show. Now for London 2012, I was able to secure accreditation through the Australian Paralympic Committee. There were strict rules though, about access, about where you could go, and what you could photograph. The requirements for Rio 2016 are far more stringent. I am going to need a special visa. They don't normally let media in without a lot of documentation, so I was accumulating this, but recently they have created a special visa class just for the Olympics. So the letter of invitation from the APC may be enough. I cannot take that chance at the present time though. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Votes

• Support --SVTCobra 23:53, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose --Pi zero (talk) 01:06, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Based on the past history, there appears to be a serious risk Hawkeye7 could become involved in some incident that, if they're accredited, could seriously mar our public image. I have never seen any reason to think they understood what the problem was in the first place, nor that they have come to understand it any better since, which strongly supports concern of repeat incidents. To me, that's a showstopper, trumping all other considerations; we must not accredit someone known to be a serious risk of besmirching our good name. Frankly, even if I accepted the nominee's claims of being unable to contribute at all without accreditation, it would only me sadder about the importance of not accrediting them. (I agree with BRS about the cliché.) --Pi zero (talk) 22:30, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I have never done anything that would mar our public image. I resigned from Wikinews to avoid it being abused as a vehicle for a bitter personal dispute. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:06, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for stating your position clearly. That has been my understanding of how you perceived the situation. --Pi zero (talk) 23:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

If you have any reason to believe otherwise, I am willing to address your concerns. I note that serious allegations made against you, which you have never responded to. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:58, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose with a heavy heart after reading some history. The cliché but appropriate phrase being "nobody's a winner here". BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:03, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
• Support So, amidst my sordid rant...I say, Meh...what the heck! You'll probably do great. Now, we ascribe to "Assume nothing." here, while the other project loves "Assume good faith." Point-of-fact: you've contributed a great deal of good stuff here, so statistically-speaking, you'll probably do the same again. Also, whatever that thing was you did, or didn't do, of might've done, or might've said or WHAT THE HECK EVER....try not to do it again, OK? --Bddpaux (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
• Support I had positive interactions with them on others WMF sites. I don't edit here much so I don't know all the history but I support. Reguyla (talk) 17:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is Closed as unsuccessful —Mikemoral♪♫ 10:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC). Do not add anymore votes or comments on this request.

Netscr1be (talk)

Name: Patrick Boake

Location: Toronto, Ontario Canada

Areas of interest: Cross-pollination of technology, science and culture, cryptocurrency

Reason: Want to cover and submit news stories

Accomplishments: Published in WikiNews, Globe & Mail ....

Contact information: https://plus.google.com/+PatrickBoake/about

User ID: NetScr1be

Applied on: 02:26, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Questions and comments

• Question Accreditation is used for original reporting (OR). It doesn't look like you've ever done OR for Wikinews; our standards for documentation of OR are more careful nowadays than they were in the early years of the project. How would you use accreditation? What sort of original reporting do you want to do? Also, for perspective, how does it happen you're applying now, after last contributing here in 2010?

and, not to split hairs...accreditation is mostly about OR; but, to not waste time going down that road, LOADS of people (apparently) seem to come here, thinking that accreditation is going to give them the Keys to the Kingdom (and, I suppose, in a small way, it does). But, we generally like to "see" who you are and what you are as a journalist, before rendering accreditation. When we accredit you, we're vouching for you as a reporter. Can you help us see why we should vouch for you? --Bddpaux (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Votes

Oppose I've made no less than two attempts to spark more input, with zero response, so I see no other recourse but to vote 'No'. --Bddpaux (talk) 15:28, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is Closed as unsuccessful —Mikemoral♪♫ 07:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC). Do not add anymore votes or comments on this request.

Yussufey (talk · contribs)

Name: yussuf Hussein mohamed

Location: Nairobi,kenya

Areas of interest: politics and other local news

Reason: to be a better person in the field of Journalism

Accomplishments: i was someone who stands for the the communities in my region

Contact information: yuhumokey hotmail ● com

User ID: Yussufey

Applied on: 00:37, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Votes

• You don't need accreditation to contribute to Wikinews. You should gain some experience with writing synthesis here, to start with. Then, with a bit of experience, you can move up to original reporting. And then would be the time to apply for accreditation. So, not now. --Pi zero (talk) 01:15, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose I believe you need to learn your way around here just a bit more first. --Bddpaux (talk) 20:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
• Not yet... Handing out accreditation to anyone and everyone willing to start is a nice beast, but what we risk here is someone taking a couple pretty pictures but not taking proper notes due to lack of understanding of what has to go to an article for it to be rock solid regarding neutrality and accuracy. For this reason, accreditation isn't handed out before such understanding is demonstrated on smaller tasks — synthesis articles and also optionally smaller instances of original reporting. (If you have a specific event in mind where accreditation is required to get in, please specify details so that someone could consider available means to get it reported here, perhaps with help from both you and local accredited Wikinewsies in the area.) --Gryllida 23:06, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
• Not at this time. 'Accomplishments' is intended to be a good-deal more specific than "i was someone who stands for the the communities in my region"; ideally, in contributing to the content on Wikinews. That's how the local community here would become comfortable in extending the trust granting accreditation is. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:51, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Microchip08 (talk)

Name: Douglas Gardner

Location: GBR

User ID: 21035

Applied on: 03:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to reapply for accreditation; my previous accreditation from a couple of years ago has since elapsed. See also: Wikinews:Accreditation requests/Microchip08. Microchip08 (talk) 03:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Closed by another Admin. as successful. --Bddpaux (talk) 02:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Votes

• — This is the only person I'm familiar with who is requesting accreditation, so this is the only one I can vote on. I vote yes, reaccredit. — Gopher65_talk 02:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
• Support likewise. Thanks. Gryllida 04:14, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
• Support No worries. --Pi zero (talk) 04:32, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
• Support Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
• Support See no reason for not re-accreditation CSJJ104 (talk) 21:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Failed (lack of support). --Bddpaux (talk) 17:14, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Xiandaniel07 (talk)

Name: Daniel Gabriel C. Prades

Location: Pangasinan, Philippines

Areas of interest: Modern Technologies

Reason: for me its an achivement to be part of something new adventure like wikipedia

Accomplishments: to be honest I am just a beginer in doing an actricles but I want to learn and share the things that I'm going to learn if I will be given a chance.

Contact information: xiandaniel07 gmail ● com or my mobile number +639174461448

User ID: 1331651

Applied on: 04:43, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

thank you

Comments

• I'm sorry, but I find you've only made one edit here at EN:WN, that being your request for accreditation. Is there anywhere else (particularly, beneath the Wikimedia "umbrella") where we might read some examples of your writing? Also, since you requested accreditation, back in early May, you've made no other edits. May I invite you to visit our Newsroom and potentially have a look around....? This is a news organization, bracketed inside a wiki, so that means nearly everything is highly community-oriented. If you find a typo or something like that in a pending article, fix it! If you have a question about policy etc., put it up over at the Water cooler. Let me know if I can help. --Bddpaux (talk) 22:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Votes

• Oppose Haven't really found any examples of your writing, but would be willing to change my vote if I see something notable. --Bddpaux (talk) 16:01, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
• Not ready, per the above; I don't like opposing in such situation. --Gryllida 04:16, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Revocations

Remember: For requests for revoking credentials, "support" or "revoke" means "remove accreditation," and "oppose" or "keep" means "keep accreditation."

Please note that only accredited reporters who have misused their credentials granted to them (as can be proved through concrete evidence) may be listed here.