User talk:Calebrw

Please see my page at English Wikipedia for more information or to leave me a message. Thanks, Calebrw (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Archives

• Archive 1 July 2008 – March 2009
• Archive 2 April 2009 – June 2009

Wikibreak

{{Wikibreak}} Going on vacation for a couple of days. Most likely from July 2 until July 6 or so. Maybe later if I don't get back to Wikinews right away. Calebrw (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

My Wikibreak took longer than I originally thought, and though I've checked in and did a few things since July 1, I'll try to be more active again now that school has started (ironically) and I won't be traveling as much. Calebrw (talk) 08:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

My RfCU

I am sorry you felt that I should not have CU rights on this project and that you felt the need to oppose my RfCU, which passed with 25 supports, 1 opposed. I will strive in the future to gain your trust and support, even if I do not have it now. Cirt (talk) 03:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

re Former U.S. Senator Norm Coleman diagnosed with Bell's palsy

You're welcome. Yeah, it seemed to have more of a TV-style than a news-style. Seems better now. Cirt (talk) 22:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

US Senate finance committee to vote on health care bill

Please see the flagged section on the article's discussion page. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 00:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Review

Can you please review British singer Robbie Williams announces his return to boyband Take That? Thanks, Rayboy8 (my talk) 22:06, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

hmmm

That is a new change. I recall when we were only meant to put them at the top! :) Perhaps a note should go somewhere for us oldys who come back on Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 23:41, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Climate contrarians in Copenhagen

Please join the discussion, if you can do it attentively, if you have some free 30 minutes? Q/0/k 11:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

First time for everything

Would you mind looking at the Stephen King article I submitted earlier today? It's my second contribution (my first got 86'd as it was stale).........I was hoping to get this one published. I'd be grateful. Buddpaul (talk) 19:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

With US mid-term elections fast approaching, three prominent Democrats announce their retirement

Did you overlook the NPOV concerns I raised on the talk page of this article before reviewing and publishing it? This is right-wing political machinations and smear-by-insinuation. It should never have been published as-is. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Haiti's banks reopen

Please can you explain/answer my concerns.    Tris   17:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Review

Can you please re-review "Batuta's case became something of a milestone in the development of Wikipedia" - interview with Konrad Godlewski? I hope that I've made the necessary edits required to get this article published. If not, could you please advise me as to what I should do? Thanks, Rayboy8 (my talk) (my contributions) 23:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Current polls show high probability of hung parliament in 2010 UK general election

I've tried to mini-explain the UK political system for those non-UKers like you said, but living in the UK I kind of take it for granted, so if you could give me any further tips on what needs to be added I would appreciate it.

--Semajdraehs (talk) 17:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Chelsea

Sorry, but Fox beat you writing the article. Feel free to move things from your article to Fox's. Cheers. --Diego Grez ^{return fire} 22:36, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

RE: Ice hockey: Blackhawks take 2-0 series lead in the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals

1. I think you'll agree "Ice hockey: Blackhawks score twice in 28 seconds to take 2-0 series lead" is way too long for an article title, heh. Also, I'm sure I'm not alone in the world if I said I haven't a flaming idea what the "Stanley Cup" or "Blackhawks" are. The original also seemed a little tabloidy.

2. Uh, it is. Heh. Should be at least that clear, I'd've thought. Ice hockey is too general? Seriously? Surely "Stanley Cup" later in the title narrows it?

Well, open to suggestions...

Fox (talk) 15:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll move the other article for the Ice hockey prefix too, until we find a compromise, for consistency. I admit "take" is a bit tame. Fox (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

1. Fine then, I'll add that score bit back. 2. I still doubt the world knows what the Stanley Cup is (well, outside the US) so Ice Hockey seems the best workaround. For the same reason, I'd put "Football:" as a prefix to a story about the FA Cup. Fox (talk) 15:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

NBA?

Once again, no mention of the sport. Fox (talk) 09:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I don't want to look like I'm targeting you personally, mate. Fox (talk) 20:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Sports prefixes

Best not to spam individual user talk pages. In the future, please instead just leave one message at a central location. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 22:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Turkey bans Google

i have developed the article since your review.

--Polysynaptic (talk) 17:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

NSW Fire Brigade Story

I have no idea what "applying a template to the article itself" means...or how to do it... --H.R.H Sovereign King Bradley The Great, Autocrat of All Australia (talk)BKCW8 (talk) 02:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Will reply on your talk page.

Failing reviews

Don't want to put you off reviewing, buuuut.... You may have seen the notice about a load of UoW final year students told getting published on Wikinews is an assignment.

If you're failing something, can you make a few tweaks where there's really silly stuff like badly formatted dates, and point the submitter at the history an relevant policy pages on their talk?

Thanks! --Brian McNeil / ^talk 14:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

WSJ? (Internet hacking group LulzSec disbands)

I'm puzzled; am I missing something? It looks to me as if the WSJ is behind a paywall, and therefor not useable as a source for WIkinews. How did you verify the information — is the only relevant information from that source in the few sentences that are freely available... or maybe do you subscribe to WSJ and so didn't notice the paywall? --Pi zero (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

You bring up an excellent point. I rechecked everything, and the only thing I found that wasn't in the sources was the last two sentences. I though the quote was in the article on the Arizona DPS, but I couldn't find it. Then I had thought I saw a bit about the italy and brazil copycats, but I didn't find it again. Calebrw (talk) 15:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hm. I see the Italy and Brazil copycats are mentioned in the LA Times source... though it doesn't seem to explicitly mention their current status. --Pi zero (talk) 16:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I now have the hardcopy WSJ article in front of me. Skimming through it, I didn't see the quote, nor any mention of Italy or Brazil.

This review seems to have gone a bit sideways. Perhaps there's a clue to where the author got the information in the so-called "Original reporting notes" on the talk page — which don't look like OR to me; it's not declared in the article, looks to me like something else that should have been declared in the article as a synthesis source, and I gather you didn't use it in your review. Sigh. --Pi zero (talk) 16:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)