Wikinews:Water cooler/miscellaneous/archives/2010/March

This is an archive of past discussions from Wikinews:Water cooler/miscellaneous/archives/2010. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current page.

BBC College of Journalism

This does look pretty interesting - if you've not already stumbled across it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/ethics-and-values/truth-accuracy/

--Brian McNeil / ^talk 19:11, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brian, this is only available to UK users. Calebrw (talk) 05:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a shame... I may have to set you up with a UK-based proxy ;) --Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:45, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Failblog.org

I have just uploaded a screengrab from this website onto Failblog.org. Can I do this? Can you please also help me with a problem if you can? The problem in question is that I have created a profile on "Can I Haz Cheeseburger?" and I have uploaded the images, but for some reason, I can't see them. Instead I see a small blue box with a white question mark in it. Can anybody please help? --Rayboy8 (my talk) (my contributions) 18:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can upload the image, as long as its local, and not to commons. I'm not sure what you mean by the second part of your question (link?). Bawolff ☺☻ 01:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think i just totally misunderstand your question. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of a 'Subscription' parameter to the {{source}}

Many major news-outlets, such as The Wall Street Journal, New York Post, FT and eventually The New York Times charge fee-based subscriptions. Maybe there should be a parameter which states that the content being linked to is fee-based. Cocoaguy^talk_contribs‽

Perhaps an approach similar to our language tags with a template after the source. {{fr}} . Bawolff ☺☻ 10:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't we already have a template for this? {{SourceReg}}? Tempodivalse [talk] 21:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or we can separate the small note and simply use (Registration required) as Bawolff mentioned. --Mike moral ♪♫ 22:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles in limbo

I was looking around and stumbled across Europe's noise exposure - first map and Refinery explosion burning 10% of Puerto Rico's fuel. The former seems to be a self-publish of House1630 (talk · contribs) and the latter an attempted publishing by the same user without the Editor flag. --Mike moral ♪♫ 02:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the 'published' tags accordingly, and nominated both articles for 'speedy deletion' as they are both outdated at this point. PSD27 (talk) 02:46, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I deleted the articles. I don't know how we can find more like these though. --Mike moral ♪♫ 02:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe all non-published articles should automatically be placed in the develop category??? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But I found these and they were in the "Published" category. That's the problem. Perhaps there could be some bot that searches and tags articles with the {{publish}} and aren't sighted. --Mike moral ♪♫ 03:06, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That might be a prudent thing to do, because this is becoming a real problem in terms of IPs and new users self-publishing. PSD27 (talk) 03:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The solution to this problem suggested when it came up recently was a DPL; see this thread. --Pi zero (talk) 03:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

┌────────────────┘
I think pywikipedia can check for specific test, but not article sighting. I would not know to even go about that. --Mike moral ♪♫ 03:20, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That other thread has a DPL in it (invisible only because currently empty) that does check for unsighted. Here's the code:

<dynamicPageList>
addfirstcategorydate=true
namespace=main
category=published
stablepages=exclude
count=10
notcategory=archived
notcategory=AutoArchived
notcategory=brief
</DynamicPageList>

Note the "stablepages=exclude" line. --Pi zero (talk) 03:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't know DPL had a "stablepages" feature. --Mike moral ♪♫ 03:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, neither did I till that thread. In retrospect, though, it figures, since the main page uses a DPL that excludes unsighted published articles.

I've added this to the Newsroom (as had been suggested in the other thread), although I wonder if I should have put it in a more prominent place. --Pi zero (talk) 03:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's always WN:AAA. --Mike moral ♪♫ 04:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Now that we're caught up on articles of this kind, new ones can be processed by a non-admin. If EPR fails to sight an article at publication (which sometimes happens), and the problem is noticed within a few hours — which is the point of having the DPL in the Newsroom — then anyone with the edit bit can fix the problem. And if the article wasn't legitimately published, any user at all can replace the {{publish}} tag with some other appropriate tag (even if what's appropriate is {{stale}} or {{delete}}). --Pi zero (talk) 04:31, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]