User talk:Tempodivalse/Archive 10

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

<-- Archive 9
Archive 11 -->
Go to active talk page

Archive 10

Please do not edit the contents of this page, it is intended for historical reference only.

Pakistani military launches ground offensive against Taliban and al-Qaeda[edit]

Oh dear, seems that we worked on the same topic, but I didn't see that you put Pakistani military launches ground offensive against Taliban and al-Qaeda article up for review when I put the Pakistan launches assault on Taliban article, otherwise I would have worked on yours instead of creating a new one. Does this sort of thing happen often, and if so, is there a good way to avoid it? Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 19:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

It happens occasionally, yes. A good way to avoid this would be to check Wikinews:Newsroom right before you plan to create an article, and check the lists to see if an article on the same topic isn't in development. If there is, it's generally better to work on the existing article. Tempodivalse [talk] 19:23, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I see that you have marked mine as a duplicate and that it should be merged. Yours has been listed as ready to be published - do you want me to merge therefore into yours? Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 19:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
It's been my experience that the article that was created later becomes merged into the existing article - since I created the article initially, your article should probably be merged into mine and not the other way around. Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 19:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Done, though I think it needs your input. --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 20:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
It looks good. Now all we have to do is wait for someone to review it. Thanks for your efforts. Tempodivalse [talk] 20:41, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for yours - seeing your copyedits has been very useful indeed. I get the distinct impression that the use of the quote template is better avoided, and that the citations should go into the text. Regards --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 21:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Actually, quote templates are allowed and encouraged, but generally they should be used sparingly, and the quotes inside them shouldn't be too lengthy (5-6 lines is a good maximum), because it tends to distract from the main article body. The main reason I removed that particular quote was because I thought it was too long. If you do decide to use quote templates, remember that the quote should appear in the main article text as well. Tempodivalse [talk] 21:40, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Aha, understood - quick, to-the-point quotes which highlight a citation already in the text. Makes sense now! --Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 09:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Yep, precisely. Tempodivalse [talk] 21:32, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

requested articles[edit]

i requested an article for development since i can't write that good of articles. Hopefully someone will take this into consideration i found two sources for it so i think thats a good start. Thank you. 71grosnog23 (talk) 22:15, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to look into it later when i get a chance. Thanks. Tempodivalse [talk] 22:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
much appreciated from 71grosnog23 (talk) 23:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Tempo, I hadn't seen that you already offered: Bull moose shot by police in Alaska. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:30, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Smile.png Thanks, Tempodivalse [talk] 00:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Bot creating stale news?[edit]

What's going on? (talk) 14:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

A bot's been creating articles copied from public domain news sources, as part of a proposal to increase our coverage: see Wikinews:Water cooler/miscellaneous#Millbot-SETimes. Unfortunately, it seems as though the bot doesn't recognise that certain articles are {{stale}}, and uploads them anyway. I understand the bot owner is trying to fix that, the bugs should be worked out soon. The bot only uploaded one stale article today, so it's not much of a disruption at the moment. Tempodivalse [talk] 15:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Listening to you at last: EU plans to tap cell phones[edit]

I really want to get this reviewed as soon as possible, published, and put in a prominent lead position. Can you help with this? --Brian McNeil / talk 16:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I was away for a couple of hours and only logged in a few minutes ago. Looks like someone else reviewed it, though. Cheers Tempodivalse [talk] 17:50, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Contributing Reporter Awards[edit] you have to let someone else give you those trophies for writing a certain number of articles or do you give them to yourself? Thanks --Rayboy8 (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Wikinews:Contributing Reporter Awards doesn't say that you can't, so I think it's probably okay. Tempodivalse [talk] 16:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

your edit of the Windows 7 article[edit]

Why did you remove this paragraph?

In Shanghai, bootleg copies of Microsoft’s Windows 7 operating system were displayed, a week before official date of sale. People in mainland China have been able to buy copies of the newest version of Microsoft’s Windows franchise for 20 yuan ($2.93) each — less than one percent of list prices, which are $320.

It conveys a quite important information: pirated software was released a week before (this is the keyword of this article!) the official release of it. Now, this information is lost. Why? Q0k (talk) 10:04, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, you didn't. It is the review tag that you placed at the top. The compare tool showed that in a messy and confusing way. Excuse me. Q0k (talk) 10:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
It's okay, no worries. Smile.png The edit comparison tool is indeed a bit confusing. Tempodivalse [talk] 13:30, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Reviewing of pirate article?[edit]

Um...surely the massive expansion of the pirate article would require someone else to review and publish it besides yourself?   Tris   19:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

In the review you've said you were basically uninvolved bar a bit of c/e and a quote. Looking at this diff-[1] it's quite a lot? And you were the only human to edit it?   Tris   19:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Actually, that content is from VOA, not myself, so technically I didn't *write* it. (The VOA importer bot was supposed to import the whole article, but due to a glitch it only uploaded the first sentence.) So i don't think i was involved enough to review it, very little of the content in that article is mine. Tempodivalse [talk] 19:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Cool, cool, no problem; just saw the large diff and thought it was a bit more than a bit of c/e!! Sorry about that!   Tris   19:25, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
No worries. Smile.png Tempodivalse [talk] 19:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Right. No, just no. You should never have reviewed that. You did the work to make it two sources and supposedly counter the bias/POV of VOA. Someone else should have judged if you did a good enough job. I'm not going to bring this up for de-editoring, but I will if it happens again. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:53, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
    Oh ... okay. I didn't think that simply adding a source would make me "involved" to the extent that I couldn't review it? I didn't change any of the content of the article, that particular story seemed NPOV. I don't see how this is any different than reviewing an article written by another editor - except that here, the "other editor" is VOA. I won't do it again, if that's considered inappropriate. Sorry. Tempodivalse [talk] 21:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Your reconfirm has been closed in record time. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 22:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
The reconfirm closed while I was watching something really interesting on TV. But, yes, I was being curt. Let's put it in this particularly non-POV way; "Voice Of America is a propaganda division of the United States Government. Their content is not intended for a domestic audience, it is to spread and establish an American perspective globally". That needs in some way worked into both the instructions for taking a VOA article from single source to multi-source, and in reviewing the resultant article. Yes, it was a mistake. Tris was right to ask you about it, but didn't distinguish the bot from an otherwise-impartial human contributor.
Importing articles from VOA should be a good way to have a framework within which we get people contributing. If they see an invite to contribute to an in-development VOA article it should be less daunting than starting from scratch. In IRC I described it as Wikinews' parallel to Wikipedia "stealing" the 1922(?) Brittannica — and that had POV too. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I understand it was a mistake now, sorry - will not do that again. I didn't think of it that way. Thanks and cheers. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Mind's reader[edit]

When a brain is working it generates an impulses (microelectrical), when somebody is thinking or operates incoming iformation (sees something or hears something) a computer remembers that impuls from the brain (from where it goes and what kind of). the next time it must be similar. <br\><br\> probably every person has own type of impulses. but if the computer could read the impulses then it could send the same to a person. it means it could play on the brain. <br\><br\> Just theory. But heard what russians are working on it. 2004 year When a brain is working it generates an impulses (microelectrical), when somebody is thinking or operates incoming iformation (sees something or hears something) a computer remembers that impuls from the brain (from where it goes and what kind of). the next time it must be similar. <br\><br\> probably every person has own type of impulses. but if the computer could read the impulses then it could send the same to a person. it means it could play on the brain. <br\><br\> Just theory. But heard what russians are working on it.

2004 year

please ask a questions and ill answer if nothing will happen with me

Alexander Kalinins Lazars son, 8street 17, Ul Yanovka (or Sablino), Saint-Petersburg, Russia (talk) 05:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to tell me and what relevance any of this has to the Wikinews project? Tempodivalse [talk] 13:39, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

At least 25 dead after train crash in Egypt[edit]

Did you mean to put this up for review? It looks ready to me. the wub "?!" 12:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I did, but forgot to add {{review}}. Tempodivalse [talk] 13:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Wow, you're on fire at the moment. That's great fast work on the Baghdad article! I don't know where all the other reviewers are though - I've done 8 in a row now, and there's still a backlog. the wub "?!" 15:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Should have failed review[edit]

I've commented, Talk:Pakistani army seizes Taliban stronghold after week-long battle. This should have failed or been reworked. And, it's from VOA again. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Responded on article talk. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikinews Briefs for 10/25/09.[edit]

Any chance this can be looked at tonight? Because after tonight it will probably be most likely stale news briefs. Sorry if i'am bugging u i know you are all very busy working on bigger things. Anything u can do would be great. Thanks again. MountainGoat1989 (talk) 00:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll look into it if I can get a chance. Cheers Tempodivalse [talk] 00:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
OK, I did some copyediting and added a second short, and put it up for review. Hopefully someone will come along soon and publish it. Thanks for your efforts! Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 00:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
The article was published: see Wikinews Shorts: October 26, 2009. Thanks! Tempodivalse [talk] 02:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

My apologies[edit]

I'm sorry for posting my article for review without going through with a fine comb. You took some heat from it and I felt that I should have. My apologies, and I will review my articles thoroughly before asking for review. Marx01 Tell me about it 00:52, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It's okay, no worries. Smile.png Tempodivalse [talk] 01:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Also (and I'm sorry to be bugging you with this), but could you take a look at one of my articles? I must thank you for changing the title, but it has not been reviewed for a day or so now. Could you look it over and decide whether it is stale, not newsworthy or poorly written? Thank you! Marx01 Tell me about it 00:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Someone else already reviewed and published it, it seems. Tempodivalse [talk] 01:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes I just saw that. It's relatively new since it was not publish when I wrote this message. Either way thanks for the thought! Marx01 Tell me about it 01:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


Care to take a look? Cirt (talk) 02:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Done and published. Tempodivalse [talk] 02:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much! Cirt (talk) 02:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hong Kong launches its first electric car‎[edit]

The answer was "Doesnt have to be a registered user. (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2009 (UTC)"

see [Discussion] —Preceding unsigned comment added by House1630 (talkcontribs) 16:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to. Does it have something to do with my unpublishing an article that you had added {{publish}} to? According to our policies Template:Review and Wikinews:Reviewing articles, only a registered user with Editor permissions can review and publish an article. You don't have editor privileges, so technically you aren't allowed to review articles. Editor status can be requested at this page. Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 16:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi there[edit]

I think you said howdy to me, but I'm new and I'll be damned if I can figure out how to respond. So this is my best attempt. Uh. Howdy yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantum mechanik (talkcontribs) 05:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

AFL provides insufficient support for European leagues: Germany[edit]

I'm thinking of nominating the article for FA status. Anything I can to do to improve it's chances? Your thoughts?--RockerballAustralia (talk) 07:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

The best thing to do, i think, would be to avoid use of technical language and try to write articles with a more broad audience in mind, who might not be familiar with the use of certain sports terms. (That issue was one of the reasons why many of your previous FAC nominations didn't succeed, i think.) This particular article seems to be fairly good in that regard. Tempodivalse [talk] 17:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you promote the article to FA status. It's been nominated for over th week requred--RockerballAustralia (talk) 11:53, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. I hesitated a bit before closing it because the number of people voting on it was small. There are now four supports and no objections for over a week, so i think it's safe to close it as a success. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Stopp and Stopp: title[edit]

It was a literary jest. You may have missed it. - Amgine | t 14:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I know it was a play of words, but it just didn't make much sense, imho. News titles should be straightforward and easy to understand. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
This isn't kindergarden. We don't need to dumb down--Brian McNeil / talk 14:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm not saying we should "dumb down" article titles. I'm saying we should make them be easily understandable to the average speaker of English. I'm a native speaker, and that headline just didn't make much sense to me. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Well, perhaps the opening might mention "cease and desist"... though it may by this point. - Amgine | t 15:10, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I still think that the current title is unnecessarily confusing and obscure. The other title was much more straightforward and to the point. Tempodivalse [talk] 16:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the fix! :) –Juliancolton | Talk 13:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem, you're welcome. Smile.png Tempodivalse [talk] 13:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


Whats the deal with you deleting my page?. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beaarthursjohnson‎ (talkcontribs)

I replied on your talk page. Tempodivalse [talk] 20:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Adminship[edit]

I'd be honoured to be nominated for adminship. Hopefully I won't mess up too bad... Dendodge T\C 20:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Nominated. See WN:RFA and don't forget to accept the nomination! Tempodivalse [talk] 20:30, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


Hi. Can you do something about this category - I want it to be renamed to "Gilgit-Baltistan" as the region is no longer known as "Northern Areas" (see wikipedia article). Ali Rana (talk) 07:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC)


Would yo mind reviewing Wikinews interviews Zahra Stardust about the upcoming by-election in the Bradfield electorate of the Australian parliament --RockerballAustralia (talk) 00:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not on the scoop e-mail list, so i'm unable to verify the majority of the article and can't review, sorry. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:59, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Article question[edit]

Hiya again, can you please take a look at this article here and make any suggestions as to how to improve it? Thanks, Rayboy8 (talk) 07:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Hm. The article seems okay, style-wise. RockerballAustralia seems to think that the back-and-forth conversation between the two doesn't constitute good news style, but i think it's acceptable in this case. The main problem with the article is that it's of questionable newsworthiness - I see it was tagged with {{newsworthy}}. News articles should generally be relevant in a broad area; here, this is of no relevance outside of a small part of Twitter. I'll post on the article's talk page momentarily to get the opinions of other users whether this is newsworthy enough for publication. Tempodivalse [talk] 15:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

World News Quiz this week[edit]

And just so you know, I've modified the World News Quiz this week which means you're gonna have to take it again. Rayboy8 (talk) 08:45, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Noted, thanks. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:54, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Man arrested after fatal accident in Londonderry, Northern Ireland[edit]

I am asking you to delete the above article as quick as you possibly can, as I am moving to Wikinews Shorts for November 2. Thanks, Rayboy8 (talk) 13:24, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. It looks like someone else expanded Man arrested after fatal accident in Londonderry, Northern Ireland after you moved it to the shorts, so it's not an exact duplicate anymore, so it's best not to delete, imho. We should probably delete the shorts instead, as now they're redundant to the main article. I tagged the shorts with {{dupe}}. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:52, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello Sir![edit]


I was wanting you only to review the article and you only reviewed it. Blast near Pakistan army headquarters kills 24. Thank you, sir. And you had asked to use local links, I will keep that in mind. And I have decided that I will be requesting editor on December 1. Do you think it is a good idea? And, I know my grammar needs improvement. I always look out the reviewer's copyedit before publish especially yours because you mainly copyedit articles before review. Awaiting reply, Srinivas 14:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Smile.png Yes, I think that requesting Editor status would be a good idea, we always need more Editors, and I think you'd pass fairly easily, given your experience writing articles. I think you could apply much earlier than Dec. 1 if you want - you would probably be successful if you requested it today (the standards for receiving editor status are not high). Cheers, Tempodivalse [talk] 14:33, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Sir, your words are not convincing me, please see User:Srinivas/n and then tell me. I have contributed so less. And I do not even have two months' experience. So, that is why I wanted to wait till December 1. Srinivas 14:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
I see you've written nine full articles and contributed to four more, according to your list. Most people's standards for receiving editor status are quite low - usually, all they want to see is a handful of articles that are of good quality and comply with the style guide. Take a look through some archived Editor requests if you want, you'll see that a lot of people passed their requests with much less contributions than you have. I myself easily passed a request for Editor status last year with only four day's worth of edits and three articles. I'm almost certain you'd pass if you applied today. -Tempodivalse [talk] 16:31, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
As per your inspiring advice, I have requested at FRRFP here. Let's see what happens! And sir, why don't you come to IRC? Please do come now and then. Srinivas 10:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I'll try to pop into the IRC more often, although I probably won't be a regular there - I see it as a bit of a distraction from my main focus/goal of writing and reviewing articles (my experience from being on IRC is that a lot stuff discussed there is unrelated to wikinews). Tempodivalse [talk] 18:25, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
But it all has to do with the Wikinews Cabal! ;) Bawolff 18:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Heh heh. Smile.png Tempodivalse [talk] 18:34, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


Hey Tempodivalse! I'm looking at an article for review and it has a telephone hotline for flood help. Is that really to be included, even though it is not a corporation advertisement? Also can I publish after making edits (I know that sounds stupid but I keep seeing that an 'uninvolved editor' must review). Sorry about the bother, just kind of worried I might do something wrong. thank you! Marx01 Tell me about it 01:00, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

It's no bother at all, i like to help people. :-) There's nothing in WN:SG that prohibits or discourages adding telephone hotlines to articles, and I think it's okay to use them, as long as they comply with WN:NPOV and aren't promotional or anything. As far as "uninvolved" goes, it's perfectly all right to copyedit or make some small changes to an article before publishing. There's no specific limits as to what makes one "involved", but I'd say you're okay as long as you don't add a lot of info to an article or significantly alter it in terms of content (but it's generally permissible to add a short sentence or a quote, if it helps give more context to the article). Hope that helps. Tempodivalse [talk] 01:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Alright I was just copyediting, adding categories, an infobox, and a picture. Thank you so much!! Marx01 Tell me about it


Hi, Tempodivalse. I translated Scientists: Snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro to melt in twenty years and I saw you added a quote that I want to add in the Spanish version, but I cannot understand who said it: "The fact that so many glaciers throughout the tropics and subtropics are showing similar responses suggests an underlying common cause," she said. Who is she? Is she Thompson? Thanks for answer, ×α£đ~es 23:59, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it was Thompson. I clarified that bit in the text now. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok. She was a male, thank you. Greetings, ×α£đ~es 00:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Oops. I thought that "Lonnie" was a female name for some reason, must have confused it with "Lori". Thanks. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:09, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


I have been able to get an interview with the CDC regarding the swine flu pandemic, but now I am at a loss of which question to ask. Could you possibly help me? Thanks, The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 00:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, let's see. Just a few ideas, off the top of my head: 1.) What measures are going to be taken to combat the swine flu? 2.) Are current anti-flu vaccines effective? How much supply of vaccine is there? 3.) What can you advise us to do to reduce our chance of being infected? 4.) Just how deadly is swine flu?
There are probably better questions, but that's the best i could come up with for the moment. Why don't you ask about this at the water cooler? You'd get a larger audience that way, perhaps someone will think up something. Tempodivalse [talk] 02:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll copy this to the water cooler also. I'm hoping this interview with Mr. Dimond goes good. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 04:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


Hi, TDV. Can you possibly delete all the foreign language redirects created by this IP? Thanks, Pmlineditor  15:35, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Done Tempodivalse [talk] 15:36, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Pmlineditor  15:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)