Talk:Latest 'CableGate' disclosures hint at US diplomatic tactics in Spain and beyond

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Review of revision 1137449 [Failed][edit]

Revision 1137449 of this article has been reviewed by Brian McNeil (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

  • Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • Style: Not ready: I could fail this without even reading any of it.

Comments by reviewer: There are two spelling errors in the first three words of the title. Please do some due diligence on this before putting it anywhere near a reviewer again. That means, don't put the review template on it until it would be good enough to publish in a mainstream broadsheet.

Questions about the above? Ask.

If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 1137449 of this article has been reviewed by Brian McNeil (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]
  • Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues.
  • Style: Not ready: I could fail this without even reading any of it.

Comments by reviewer: There are two spelling errors in the first three words of the title. Please do some due diligence on this before putting it anywhere near a reviewer again. That means, don't put the review template on it until it would be good enough to publish in a mainstream broadsheet.

Questions about the above? Ask.

If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Cleanup[edit]

This needs restarted from scratch, and written carefully instead of a frantic rush to simply regurgitate what the Mainstream media have published.

The huge list of related news are barely related; the Wikileaks disclosures should produce hundreds of stories, they do not all merit placement there.

Start by listing all the relevant leaked cables, one or two now-current reports on this story, then start using the Google News archive search to find reports current at the time of the leaked-about events. Collect the lot, here on the talk, and write a completely fresh lede. No more than 50 words.

Once that's done, you'll have 80% of the story understood and be able to present it to readers. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is an excellant opportunity to learn the craft of journalism, Wackywace. WikiLeaks means all the documents are out here; you can break details yourself, without dashing around - all it takes is some practice digging out the good bits. I've been here for years; what I've learned since (when'd I join? '06?) is, so Napier University tells me, enough to jump at least a year of a journalism course. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:17, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let me add to that; BRS and I attended their open day a few months back, with a specific interest in the four-year BA (Hons) degree in journalism. The lecturer described the first two years to school-leavers as 'learning to write'. In my case, I'd "probably be put straight into the third or fourth year". Now, the digging into the Wikileaks release... --Brian McNeil / talk 22:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Original reporting[edit]

In going from 'true' original documents, you need to read with an eye to what might be important. There, then, is the requirement to put that more into context, and start to build a better picture of where the story lies. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Released cables[edit]

From http://cablegate.wikileaks.org

  1. 06MADRID1914 - 2006-07-28 - Court frees 'Spanish Taliban'
    • Spanish Supreme Court, July 24, anulled six-year prison sentence against Hamed Abderrahaman Ahmed; to, immediately, be released from prison. Was captured in Afghanistan (or handed to such by Pakistan forces). Held in GitMo. Handed to Spanish authorities February 2004. Evidence from GitMo thrown out; Court described conditions as "impossible to explain, much less justify." This influencing case against Lahcen Ikassrien (a Moroccan), ex-GitMo, xferred to ESP July '05. At time of cable, being released on bail. Hamed Abderrahaman Ahmed then planning to sue US Gov over suffering in GitMo.
  2. 07MADRID546 - 2007-03-23 - ESP Gov acknowledges US concern over Iraq War comments
    • Magistrate Baltasar Garzon wrote Mar 20 op-ed re:GitMo, describing as "criminal responsibility".
    • Socialist Party secretary Jose Blanco reiterated same on TV.
    • US Gov "cautioned that continued statements on this issue by senior Spanish figures would be viewed negatively by the USG."
  3. 07MADRID911 - 2007-05-14
    • High-level Defense Talks
    • 3 US Servicemen facing charges over 2003 death of Spaniard cameraman Jose Couso during Battle for Baghdad.
    • Work to get any case against Donald Rumsfeld opposed, and dismissed. The judge in the case was, at time of cable dispatch, working to dismiss it.
  4. 09MADRID614 - 2009-06-26 - Planned Napolitano's July 1 visit to Madrid.
    • A follow-on from June 24 meeting with ESP Interior Minister Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba in Washington.
    • Signature of Memorandum of Understanding on DHS Immigration Advisory Program.
    • ESP Govt may take up to 5 additional GitMo detainees.
    • To target bulk cash smuggling at/thru Barajas Airport
    • Problems with judges invoking 'universal jurisdiction' to indict former US Govt. officials over torture at GitMo.

That is a summary from the so-far released cables. Next, those would need put in context. And, linked to relevant news reports that may highlight discrepancies between these and what is publicly perceived. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:21, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Current reports[edit]

Based on the above selection of cables, and some well-crafted Google News searches, the following come up:

Now, what should be clear - so far - is that some confusion, or a not-considered-critical detail, mentioned in one report leads to more "meat" for a more omprehensive and in-depth article. But, what about the GNews archives? Regardless, you realistically need to have gone through all the above before you can write the lede. Might want to pick out some of the more gory or sordid details from these sources that have, conveniently, been translated out of El Pais. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Historical' reports[edit]

No need to go too deep to get stuff here; w:Baltasar Garzón tells you most of the stuff you need to know. --Brian McNeil / talk 01:05, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Review of revision 1137830 [Passed][edit]

Revision 1137830 of this article has been reviewed by Wackywace (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 07:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Comments by reviewer: Really interesting piece! Thanks for the guide on the talk page, which I have copied down to use in the future :)

The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 1137830 of this article has been reviewed by Wackywace (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 07:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Comments by reviewer: Really interesting piece! Thanks for the guide on the talk page, which I have copied down to use in the future :)

The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
  • This article, deemed "Wikinews's best work" is many one sentence paragraphs and short two sentence paragraphs. Does this mean that Wikinews endorses and encourages short paragraphs and choppy writing? Mattisse (talk) 19:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article was voted on, and consensus decided that it was an article that met the requirements of featured articles. If you feel that the article is not worth featured article status, you are invited to request a reversal, by filing a new request on the relevant page. — μ 20:17, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "choppy"? Compared to what? This isn't Wikipedia, you should be comparing with other news sources and the project Style Guide. You'll find this is by-and-large a style the BBC might us. The point is to make it digestible. As indicated above, you can challenge its FA status; please review other news publications first. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:53, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was basing it on a reviewer's statement about one of my articles that one sentence paragraphs were less than ideal and were to be avoided. He especially stress this "rule" regarding the lede. Mattisse (talk) 22:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Latest_%27CableGate%27_disclosures_hint_at_US_diplomatic_tactics_in_Spain_and_beyond&oldid=1222505"