Sorry, I forgot to add an image to the lead. My bad. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 02:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- No worries, no harm was done.
 Tempodivalse [talk] 02:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I can't get anyone in IRC to answer my requests for review and this article is going to go stale in a few hours :( This is a plea for help... Regards --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 18:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'll see if I can take a look at the article in a moment. Tempodivalse [talk] 18:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 Reviewed and published. Don't forget you can use {{breaking review}} in the future to mark articles that are especially time-sensitive and need quick review. Tempodivalse [talk] 18:51, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I didn't think—at the time—that it warranted a breaking review, but in hindsight. I have returned the favour btw. --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Oh, okay, thanks. Sorry, I'm a noob at this. :P SuperFlash101 (talk) 23:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- No worries. :-) Tempodivalse [talk] 23:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. The separate article has been created at New promotional events set for Disney's "Phineas and Ferb's Christmas Vacation" if you'd like to review it. SuperFlash101 (talk) 04:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, i was offline for the last couple of hours, but it looks like someone else already got around to reviewing it. Tempodivalse [talk] 15:22, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] re:Welcome
Thanks for the message! I really hope that I will be able to contribute here productively.--Benny the mascot (talk) 23:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- Could you please take a look at Benet Academy students raise money for leukemia patient and advise me on what I can do to improve the article? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, let me see. While I see you've done a great job of writing in "news" style, and have adhered to WN:NPOV well, I see a fundamental problem: the article is of questionable newsworthiness. While we encourage local news, especially if it includes original reporting, micro-local (of little relevance outside a very specific/narrow topic or area) news might not be appropriate for Wikinews. In this case, this seems sort of borderline; it doesn't seem to be especially significant, even at the local level. I tend to agree with the two users who failed the review of the article previously as far as newsworthiness is concerned. You might want to ask about this on the article talk page, to get the opinions of other users. Hope i helped. Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 03:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice! I've left a note on the talk page as you suggested. Benny the mascot (talk) 04:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- So...what's going to happen to the article??? Benny the mascot (talk) 21:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Well, if an article isn't edited for several days, it usually gets tagged as {{abandoned}} and {{stale}}, and gets deleted through proposed deletions within a few days if it's not edited/improved. I'm really not sure what can be done, at this point, to rescue the article or make it more newsworthy - while your recent efforts to make it more noteworthy/significant were good, i'm not sure it's enough. Tempodivalse [talk] 21:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oh well...thanks for your advice! Just out of curiosity, what effect (if any) did the info I added about local churches' mass intentions have on the article's newsworthiness? Benny the mascot (talk) 01:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I think the extra information you added did make the article somewhat more significant/relevant to a larger audience; unfortunately, even then, I think it's sort of borderline as far as newsworthiness is concerned. But don't let this discourage you from contributing in the future - I think you've gotten most of our stylistic and NPOV policies down well, it's just that the newsworthiness aspect was questionable. (This might be partially the project's fault, as we don't have a very clear definition of what qualifies as "newsworthy" - WN:CG only says "News should be relevant" - which is rather ambiguous and subjective. Might be something to bring up on the water cooler.) Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 02:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, I've already started another article. DuPage County jury sentences Brian Dugan to death is currently in the reviewing queue, and I can't wait to see what the result is for that! You are right about the lack of a clear policy; I actually wrote the Benet article once I read the policy and found no rules regarding the "audience" of the event. In fact, I thought that ANY news was welcome here. Perhaps posting a note on the water cooler might be a good idea. Benny the mascot (talk) 02:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I started a thread at the WC about this, Wikinews:Water cooler/policy#Newsworthiness - how to define it.3F. Comments and suggestions welcome. Tempodivalse [talk] 03:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping me out with all of this; I really appreciate it! Benny the mascot (talk) 03:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome. If you ever need help again, please don't hesitate to ask me. :-) Tempodivalse [talk] 03:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Why is there no Glenn Beck's appendix article?
I like writing about Glenn Beck! That wasn't supposed to be in the sandbox, it was verified! What's the dealio? Love, Glenn Beck
- Um, no. That article was patent nonsense and met speedy deletion criteria. We don't take jokes like that very well here, and you might be facing a block if you create disruptive/nonsense pages again. Tempodivalse [talk] 03:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
No seriously, where's my Glenn Beck article? I'm so mad that communism lives in the internet and now in the USA. Just kidding, I love this democratic country. Are you a democrat? I would love to know!
- Please stop these comments. Wikinews is not a forum for random conversation. Are you here to contribute constructively to the project, or to talk nonsense? If it's the latter, please go away, or else be blocked. Tempodivalse [talk] 03:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Como usas underline?
¡Yo nessicito ayuda con mi pagina de web! Yo voy escribar para mi madre.
- Lo siento, pero no puedo hablar espanol muy bien. Puede Ud. hablar ingles? Además, esto es Wikinoticas Ingles. Si usted quiere un sitio Wikinoticas donde la gente puede hablar español, ver este. Tempodivalse [talk] 03:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] EmBOTellado
Thank you very much, Best regards!!! --Ezarate (talk) 19:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome! :-) Tempodivalse [talk] 19:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] re: date
Thanks for letting me know! Benny the mascot (talk) 16:47, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- No problem, you're welcome. Tempodivalse [talk] 17:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Benet article
I'd like to be able to work on my Benet article a bit longer. Should I keep it where it is right now, or should I move it to a user subpage? Benny the mascot (talk) 16:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- It depends. If you think it might be a few days before you can re-request review, it might be safer to move it to userspace, as the article could be tagged with {{abandoned}} and deleted by WN:PROD after a few days. If you can get it up for review within the next day or two, however, you can probably let it stay as-is without fear of it being deleted. Tempodivalse [talk] 17:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Google redirects
You were very close with the redirect. It also needs {{Google News}} on it [1]. Cheers. Bawolff ☺☻ 02:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, that's right. I thought I was forgetting something but couldn't remember what. Thanks. Tempodivalse [talk] 02:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Thank You
Thanx for your welcome I hope to be able to contribute. --Mlpearc (talk) 16:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Tempodivalse [talk] 17:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Ireland requests replay of FIFA World Cup play-off with France
Ireland requests replay of FIFA World Cup play-off with France Could someone please review new changes. thanks Mrchris (talk) 18:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
- Done. Tempodivalse [talk] 15:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Factors in reviewing articles
Hi Tempodivalse! I've had an article in line for review for over a day (Central Michigan quarterback sets passing record, becomes finalist for award), yet it seems that other articles are being reviewed a lot quicker than mine. In your experience, what factors affect a reviewer's decision to review an article? Is there anything I should be worried about if my article sits in line for a while? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- A lot of factors could play into what articles a reviewer decides to look at - the biggest on is probably size, if an article is too long or contains too many sources, some people might not have the time or energy to go over them. (That's probably not an issue in this instance.) The reason your article hasn't been reviewed quicker, I think, is because it has some technical stuff in it, and some people tend to avoid reviewing articles with complex sports terms because they're frequently unfamiliar with them, and might not be able to completely understand them. Don't worry though - someone should get around to it soon. You can always try asking for someone to do a review in the chat room, that works sometimes. (I'd review the article myself right now, but I don't have a lot of time. If it's not reviewed by tomorrow, I'll try to have a look at it.) Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 04:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Looks like someone already reviewed and published it, while I was away. Tempodivalse [talk] 15:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, but thank you for the advice! I'll definitely keep that in mind in the future. Benny the mascot (talk) 15:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
|
