Talk:Congressman Thad McCotter to run for U.S. President
Add topicDifficulty verifying
[edit]Is there an unlisted source at work here?
This article says:
- He has publicly considered a run since May after an appearance on Fox News' Red Eye program when host Greg Gutfeld repeatedly asked him if he would enter the race.
This would be inferring a lot more than I see in the source. I'm willing to take it as implied that it was in May, and I'd be half-willing to read an implication that it was actually on Red Eye — but it says "prodded" which really can't be assumed to imply a question (it could have been a statement "you should run"), and even if the prodding took place on Red Eye there's nothing in the source saying McCotter was on the program at the time.
So far, that's the most extensive verification problem I've tangled with. --Pi zero (talk) 22:46, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- No. I think I misinterpreted the source, I have corrected it.--William S. Saturn (talk) 22:52, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Review of revision 1253565 [Passed]
[edit]  |
Revision 1253565 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
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 1253565 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer:
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. |
Comment/question about copy-editing from a novice editor
[edit]I'm not sure of the rules/conventions here. I found the article via a link from the Wikipedia article on the congressman. I compared some of the text of the article to the text of the congressman's campaign website and when I saw an error (either typo or copy/paste) I tried to correct it. I see that my edit is under review, and I certainly understand that substantive changes are not to be made to a news article after it is published.
I have one suggestion for an additional clarification/improvement, not in the text of the article itself but rather in a wikilink.
I think the link on the text "House of Representatives" in the 5th listed source should direct the reader to the wiki article "United States House of Representatives" rather than to the more generic "House of Representatives". Over on regular wikipedia, I would just go ahead and make the edit -- over there, I know it's annoying for someone to write a comment about an article when they could have just gone ahead and made the edit if they thought it was justified -- but I don't want to create inappropriate waves here. Will await feedback (if any) and education (I have looked at some of the Help pages here, I see more guidelines for writing news articles than for editing them, for reasons that I understand -- i.e., wikinews is not an encyclopedia). NameIsRon (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Obvious typo corrections are okay even long after the article is published (we do those even to articles from years ago, though of course it takes an admin to implement those). The more interesting question in this case is the source of information: our article source that lists those points misspells it "soul". I've suggested adding an external link to the campaign website, which should more-or-less clarify the matter... assuming another reviewer agrees that adding that external link now, more than 24 hours after publication, is within our archive policy.
- I'd say specifying which House of Representatives is within archive policy, and I'd self-sight it... except of course that I can't do so without also sighting the external link, which I've already chosen to leave for someone else (in the interest of getting a second opinion on that). --Pi zero (talk) 16:03, 3 July 2011 (UTC)