Talk:20-year-old astrophotographer captures rare solar eclipse on Saturn

Pre-review

Status:    Recommend publish

Version evaluated: URL not provided

• Copyright: Passed
• Newsworthiness: Passed
• Verifiability: Passed
• NPOV: Passed
• Style: Passed

Notes for author(s):

This article is fine—and that's pretty darn impressive given that this appears to be the drafter's first Wikinews article. It could be better, but I see no flaws big enough to prohibit publishing it right away. In other words: Required changes: None. Non-required changes: The tone doesn't 100% jibe with Wikinews', but it's close enough. I'd like to see more attribution. "Many people praised it" is borderline okay, but it's better to say who praised it and what they said. I'd like more quotes from experts on why this event matters, but it's good enough without them. "She got up at 1:00 a.m." is okay, but "She said in a Reddit post that she got up at 1:00 a.m." is more our way of doing things.

Notes for reviewer:

No notes provided for reviewer

---

This is a pre-review only and is not part of the official review process. A pre-review is meant to help the author or authors improve the article and increase the likelihood of it passing a formal review. This pre-review was not done by a reviewer and represents a recommendation that can be heeded or ignored.

Add date

@Frodo Maximus

Hi @George Ho @Wikiwide @BigKrow @Lofi Gurl @Back ache @Md Mobashir Hossain @Almondo2025, @Dsuke1998AEOS, @Ternera, @Monsieur2137 @Asked42, @Sheminghui.WU, @excelblue (if you want yourself removed or someone else added to this list, please inquire here) A revision has been requested. Here is a list of what to do. (If/when you intend to start working on it, please Subscribe to this section and to this talk page, and post reply messages here when you started and finished editing) See below:

1. Specify date in first paragraph // WN:5W

Thanks, -- Gryllida 12:34, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

I have updated the date based on the date he posted the images to his Instagram. Ternera (talk) 13:06, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I contacted AJ Smadi through instagram and he told me that the image was captured on June 1, 2025. So yes the date is correct. the article is now ready to be published. Frodo Maximus (talk) 13:54, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh dear. Per WN:FRESH, we don't usually publish articles about events more than two or three days old. In my time here, we've made exceptions for 1) original reporting and 2) things like scientific discoveries, which generally don't hit the reliable-source media until months after they're made.

How do we feel about classifying this as the latter? It clearly didn't hit the media until two days ago. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:45, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24 So, is this article getting published? Frodo Maximus (talk) 05:24, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

It's not up to me. A reveiwer has to decide.

Sometimes you write a perfect article and it doesn't get published because no one on the review team was available in time. That's Wikinews, and we all have to find a way to deal with that. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:35, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I think it should be published now! Md Mobashir Hossain (talk) 03:35, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Image rights

@Frodo Maximus, we need to make sure we have the legal right to use that image. Content posted to Instagram remains the property of the original uploader, so unless it's clearly licensed for reuse, we’ll need to get permission before using it.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 14:06, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I have the permission to use the image. I contacted the astrophotographer regarding it and then i uploaded it to the wiki. Frodo Maximus (talk) 17:57, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright In case you need a validation. I will tell the photographer to mail you the consent. Kindly share your work mail. Frodo Maximus (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright Hey, I got your work email from your user page! the photographer will reach out to you soon! Frodo Maximus (talk) 18:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I received the email and have responded with an additional request to cross-reference the email address with the Instagram account. Once that is completed, we should be ready to move forward.

I am okay with publishing this article even though it is technically stale, because it reports a rare event and has educational value. It documents astrophotography techniques, planning tools like Stellarium, and telescope setup, all of which contribute to public understanding of space observation.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 13:09, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright Okay, Sounds great! Frodo Maximus (talk) 13:20, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

@Frodo Maximus, I haven't heard back from the image owner to confirm ownership of the image. Without the specific response requested, we can’t confirm the email and Instagram account are both owned by the same individual. Without that confirmation, we don't have permission to use the image.

We are quickly running out of time, if we haven't already. Can you touch base with the owner again and ask them to check their email for a reply from me? Maybe it got flagged as spam. Thanks.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 21:03, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Review of revision 4868396 [Passed]

Revision 4868396 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:05, 10 July 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: WN:Freshness permits occasional exceptions, and in this case, I feel one is justified due to the rarity of the event and the educational value of the article. Although the event occurred on June 1, both listed sources were published on June 28. It also took several days to coordinate with the photographer and secure a Grant of License to use the image, which we now have on file via Scoop. As part of the review process (see edit history for details): Removed a private video that could not be accessed or verified. Removed unsupported statements that may be verifiable, but were not backed by the listed sources. Added specific location details for where the featured photograph was taken. Reformatted times to align with WN:Style guidelines. Removed the year from the lede Note to Frodo Maximus: In future cases like this, you could turn it into original reporting by briefly interviewing the photographer about the image and the process. This can help improve freshness and provide exclusive insight. 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 4868396 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 01:05, 10 July 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: WN:Freshness permits occasional exceptions, and in this case, I feel one is justified due to the rarity of the event and the educational value of the article. Although the event occurred on June 1, both listed sources were published on June 28. It also took several days to coordinate with the photographer and secure a Grant of License to use the image, which we now have on file via Scoop. As part of the review process (see edit history for details): Removed a private video that could not be accessed or verified. Removed unsupported statements that may be verifiable, but were not backed by the listed sources. Added specific location details for where the featured photograph was taken. Reformatted times to align with WN:Style guidelines. Removed the year from the lede Note to Frodo Maximus: In future cases like this, you could turn it into original reporting by briefly interviewing the photographer about the image and the process. This can help improve freshness and provide exclusive insight. 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.