Talk:Main Page/Archive13

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

Contents

Suggestion for front page articles[edit]

This is really annoying. Sometimes when I start an article it will not get noticed and put on the front page until I start nagging the mods. Either a) go proper wiki and let people add articles to the front page and moderate it or b) have a second page where people can submit their articles for moderation once completed. Genjix 11:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Anyone can publish an article, you just add {{publish}} to it--Cspurrier 15:19, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, I added that to the top of an article and I didn't see it appear on the front page. Does it then get moderated before being released? Genjix 20:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
You may have to click the "Refresh" link on the main page. --Chiacomo (talk) 21:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

?[edit]

How are you supposed to call the hotline without owning a computer to see it first?!?

I suppose in one of two ways: if you don't have access to a computer at a particular time but wrote down the number, or if a friend told you. -- IlyaHaykinson 08:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Every copy of The Wikinews Print Edition also has the number listed. --Cspurrier 14:57, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

This is why I didn't support the hotline :-) Dan100 (Talk) 11:26, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Minor edits[edit]

Spotted a typo on main page (President Vicente Fox claims that a leaked draft BY the report by prosecutor Ignacio Carrillo). How do we request such corrections? Phil Murray 10:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

You may fix it/edit it here Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 10:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

A typo on the Commonwealth Games section on the main page "Nineth"--should be "Ninth". I just spent about 45 minutes trying to figure out how to change it and have been to various pages and templates but no luck finding how to change that particular part. I'm more than happy to do it, but it shouldn't be that hard to find how to change something so simple. Smac 16:23, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Australia The Center of the World?[edit]

It appears to me to be very biased to have on average 1 major news item each day relating to Australia. Is there an Australian running the show, adding his bias by selecting these Australian news items for inclusion each day? Or are the majority of stories submitted from Australia and added because there isn't much else to submit?

At the moment every article created by this Wiki appears on the main page. Articles are created by intersted persons, and the number of articles related to each country is the direct result of the number of people who are interested in writing about that country. Anyone can write an article about any country or topic whenever they like, there is no-one "running the show". If you are asking about the articles that appear as "lead" stories, with pictures, on the main page, any contributor can elevate an article to lead status, and although there are guidelines as to which types of articles can be leads, there is no one person making the decisions. - Borofkin 00:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Wikinews does not assign stories. Contributors choose to write articles which interest them. At this time there are a wonderfully active number of contributors from Australia writing about the news they see, that is important to them. Considering how small a portion of Wikinews's traffic is from Australia, I'd have to say they're a bunch of over-achieving journalists. North America could produce many more articles were there more writers amongst our many readers from that continent. - Amgine | talk en.WN 00:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Ditto Amgine; North America sucks in terms of contributions because, imo,
  • #1 we're mostly either tweedle dee(conservative/republican) or tweedle dum(liberal/democrat) in terms of mentality(i.e. we can not think) and
  • #2 we're so poorly educated we all write like monkeys

THANK GOD for the Aussies and Europeans. Neutralizer 01:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

What? I am from the United States, a moderate by any standard, and monkeys have NOTHING on me. There is nothing "special" about Europeans or Australians; they're just people too. On this idea, that there are too many Australian articles for world news, I agree. Are all the articles being contributed by the same person/group? If so, I'm sure a polite request that only INTERNATIONAL affairs in Australia be reported, because isn't there a page for Australian News? - Wikiuser (anonymous) 10:47, 7 March 2006, EST
Everything published shows up on the homepage, and should show up on the home page. If you only want North American news, visit the category. Stop whining that people from Australia put true effort into this project. -- user:zanimum, Canada

RSS Issues[edit]

I'm trying to subscribe for the RSS service but this page doesn't work...

I have Opera as webbrowser... (preceding unsigned comment made by 82.52.73.205)

That is the wrong page, please use: http://feeds.feedburner.com/WikinewsLatestNews

Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 00:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikification[edit]

Why is it that so many writers fail to wikify their articles? I think the lack of links greatly reduces the effectiveness of otherwise good articles. I wikify when I can/want to, but after all I am only one man. -MescalineBanana 04:15, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

You are not the only one feeling that dissapointment. I think that most anon editors just don't get the whole [[w:Wikipedia Article|Article]] thing. ironiridis 17:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
There was a big argument a while back weather to wikify or not wikify. the conclusion was to only do it for stuff directly relating to the article (which I think is a bad thing as the more the better IMHO, but...) Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 00:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with you Bawolff- one of our advantages is the closeness we have with WP. Lyellin 18:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Heh, you could make a case that links within our own site should use [[wn:...|...]] while links to wikipedia should use [[...]]. Nyarlathotep 18:47, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I would argue against as complete wikification as a wikipedia article would usually have. First and foremost, we aren't an encyclopedia so wikification of items like years and dates is out (This also has unintended side-effects like ending up with an article appearing under two dates, so if written about a future event like an election the old article might pop up on the main page). Then there's wikification of common terms like Parliament, I edit out things like this and will continue to do so. I think people should strive for an informative balance that keeps the number of links reasonable. Its things like locations and people that wikilinks are important for; most of the other things that might be wikified are probably one step away with those links in place. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Brian - I don't disagree on the dates/years issue. My thought is more on the types of things that someone may need to know more about in an article - Names, events, specific things. In my mind "common" terms doesn't really apply anywhere. From experience at College, understanding Parliament is not always.... expected, and a link might be useful if someone not versed in Political Science or the British government reads the article. 130.49.145.61 15:49, 28 March 2006 (UTC) - That comment would be me.... Lyellin 15:52, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Umm, you could wikify years and dates, but you'd have to send the link to wikipedia, not our category. In general, anything which users might want to read more about should be wikified. Nyarlathotep 16:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

International news[edit]

It seems to me that big, international news items are covered more seldom in WikiNews than in "more conventional" news sources. If this is not a totally wrong observation, how could this be helped? I can see that writing articles on "big issues" is more time comsuming than items on things like "Study reveals 10% of telecommuters work nude" (don't get me wrong: I want these stories to be written as well, of course). How can Wikinews cover such issues as good as - or better - than any other conventional news source? Ehjort 17:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, we're covering the French student hostage situation right now. We were on top of that within minutes of it hitting the "more conventional" CNN.com. ironiridis 17:20, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
And credit for that goes to User:DragonFire1024, thank you very much. ironiridis 17:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
This wasn't meant as no offence or something; just want to discuss if we could make it easier; but sure no prob, I can read newspapers as well. Well done, DragonFire! Ehjort 19:21, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
And by the way this isn't about when we cover it, but that we cover it. Ehjort 19:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Good point. I think that the problem here is your definition of "International", too. If you're talking from the vantagepoint of a US citizen, there have been a ton of Australian articles published recently (see above discussion). There do seem to be big gaps in coverage; South America and Africa seem to get particularly little coverage in comparison to their populations. The best way to solve this problem is to take the situation into your own hands; get a news aggregation source and use specific keywords to filter out the stuff from countries we already cover regularly. ironiridis 19:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
As a norwegian I don't expect too much. As it is, there are a few "international issues" these days - Iraq/Afghanistan/Guanatanamo/N. Corea/Israel - Palestina/ and so on - (all this trouble around the world is rather depressing). Your point about S. America/Africa is good. I do try to help whenever I can, but I feel I should put a little more effort into it than just dropping a headline and a few lines transcribed from an article somewhere else. But, that is a beginning. And a wiki's advantage - it will grow.Ehjort 20:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

A former teacher up to 22 hostages[edit]

"A former teacher up to 22 hostages in Colbert de Torcy High School located near Le Mans, France. Reports say the hostage-taker is armed, and that a special forces team trained in hostage negotiations, is on the scene."

What does "up to" mean?!! Unbreakable_MJ 19:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

It's a wiki, man. Fix it. :) ironiridis 19:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I know but how? There's no 'edit this page' button --Unbreakable_MJ 19:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
See the top of this page, on the right. The blue box has links for editing the leads. This link is the one you want to click on to edit what you're referring to. ironiridis 19:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
But, it got fixed already. Use those links in the future. ironiridis 19:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah I see, but I removed the 'who' word from your edit :p Thank you for teaching me this one. --Unbreakable_MJ 19:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Not my edit. Heh. ironiridis 19:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Also, the "who" you removed was correct; you created a grammatical error when you removed it. ironiridis 19:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll start taking grammer lessons then --Unbreakable_MJ 20:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Screw that. Be bold, make mistakes, just edit, write, and edit more. It's a wiki. :) ironiridis 20:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but I got to be correct too. I'm always correcting stuff! Just to make sure: "A former WHO teacher held up to 22..." is grammatically correct?? --Unbreakable_MJ 20:08, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Ah, brainAutoCorrect was enabled on that one. You're right, it wasn't grammatically correct, however, the intention was to put the word "who" after the word "teacher", which would have made it more correct than both versions. It should have been "A former teacher who held up to 22 hostages (...), surrendered without incident(...)" Good call. ironiridis 20:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Done. I've learnt a couple of things just now :) --Unbreakable_MJ 20:20, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Milosevic is a bit more important than the US possibly getting mad cow disease[edit]

So why then is the US mad cow disease (which let's face it, its had since the 2000 Presidential election) in the top spot? A few cows and a few farmers vs a genocidal loser dying. US Centric

Change it. The links to do so are on the top of this page. Also, there is Workspace as a place to make the changes. BTW, I agree with you :) Edbrown05 07:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
yes but a few cow and some farmers could kill hundreds with mad cow. Both are important, one for future the other for past history ... difficult to rate between the 2 news ... (and mars orbiter ?) Jacques Divol
The Milosevic story was the lead, but was removed when the US Mad Cow case came along and it was breaking news at the time and newer. Jason Safoutin 12:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Milosevic: The Hague spelling[edit]

It should be either "The Hague" (English) or "Den Haag" (Dutch) for the location on the Milosevic article - currently it's a mixture.

- JD

Lead[edit]

A new lead is needed. The current one has been there for a couple of day's

Please add a zh link[edit]

Chinese Wikinews has been started in Mar. 14 2006, So Please add a interlang for zh Main page. Thank you.--220.130.153.202 15:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

done Jacques Divol

Featuring original reporting[edit]

There have been 17 stories containing original reporting this month already. That makes an average of almost one per day. I find it regrettable that the "Original Reporting" box is now pushed all the way down to the right side, where almost nobody will see it, even below "disputed stories" which is largely for our internal use. Original reporting is what makes us more than a news summary service and a true citizen journalism project. We should put much greater emphasis on these stories, as it will also drive the reporting process.

I see several options:

  • Add a list of about 10 stories like the one on Category:Original reporting (i.e. including dates) right below the featured story.
  • Replace "Featured story" with "Original reporting", and add a DPL of about 3 stories below it.
  • Make the entire right hand column about participation, "best of" content (featured story) and original reporting; that is, turn the second lead box into one about OR
  • Tweak DPL to highlight original reporting stories in the main story list.

What do others think? I very much believe the current situation is not satisfactory. We're underselling our exclusive content.--Eloquence 04:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed...while I think stories gleaned from other sources can be valuable, the true value is in the original reporting. Muhgcee 03:39, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I think somebody should think about the front page presentation, and put the best foot forward. There is no reason submissions of 'Original reporting' stories can't be expanded by other editors with more information gleaned from Mainstream media reporting to strengthen the story as a whole. -Edbrown05 05:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
"Edit mercilessly." Just because a story is tagged 'Original reporting' does not mean it is done. Any related information to the news event is a justifiable expansion. -Edbrown05 06:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
HOw do you suggest highlighting in the main DPL? I know we used to use template:OR, but that obviously doesn't work anymore with DPLs. All in all this is good Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 00:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Commenwealth Games?[edit]

What happened to the medal tally?--elliot_k 12:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Not Very Nice[edit]

This is a post I found on

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2005/02/citizen_journal.html

Read the "Comments" section starting with "...WikiNews is a very serious and dangerous trend in journalism..."

(rest of comment not posted due to due to copyright concerns)

I think that it is not very nice at all. What do you guys think? I am not sure why people keep attacking the Wikimedia projects. First there was the the John Seigenthaler thing now this.

This is extremly concerning. Also I'm sure I've read this before. Has this came up previously, or did they just copy the wikipedia attack. 00:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

This is also copyright violation. (sorry about the date thing, was looking at the URL) irid:t 00:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

The John Seigenthaler incident proved something: that there is no such thing has bad publicity (Wikipedia had a large traffic surge - which has continued - after the story broke). Dan100 (Talk) 11:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Thats good. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 23:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

They are neophobes, old farts stuck in their old ways. This doesn't worry me in the least. We've got hundreds of thousands of users actively working toward the goal of Wikimedia. A few dissenters aren't going to stop us. -MescalineBanana 19:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

What happened to the MainPage?[edit]

It's like a licorice allsort. The colours are making my eyes water! --elliot_k 12:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

don't know, i do not think it's an UI improvement. Lack interwiki link, colors are not right .... Jacques Divol 12:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I do not understand why dan100 do not ask others before this change... Jacques Divol
I agree Divol. It freaks the shit outta me anytime someone changes it without discussion or alert! Made me literally jump outta my seat. Thought we'd been taken over by code aliens. --elliot_k 12:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Crikey, it's a wonder we don't still all live in caves... Change isn't always bad, and I think it's high time we had a fresh new look. Not like it made any fundemental changes, and it seems well coded (thanks Yorktown1776).

Anyway, let's have a straw poll

  • I like this Main Page
  1. Me Dan100 (Talk) 20:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  2. Partially. The distribution is nice (synchronizing with Wikipedia Main Page?) but I don't like some colours. --Julián Ortega - My talk 22:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Needs work, but I can definitely see this as a replacement for the current (somewhat mundane) main page. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 19:46, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. I really like a more colorful page. -- IlyaHaykinson 18:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. I prefer something more like this. But the current layout is slightly better as far as not having to scroll down to see headlines, featured article, etc. I've heard many times that internet users don't want to scroll a lot. For both versions there is also some repetition at the top with the whole "news source you can write!" line which may not be necessary but it's not a big deal. --Meanmeancoffeebean 13:07, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I like the current one
  1. Aye Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 21:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC) (Voting is Evil btw)
  2. Me too;Neutralizer 23:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. --Cspurrier 23:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. - other ones two wide (in fx 1.5.0.1 on cologne blue), Don't like how develop is intergrated, and header takes up to much real-estate(I don't care too much about the header, but the other points annoy me) Bawolff. Thats not to say I don't like parts, and maybe in the future a variation on that would work, but currently the current one is better. ☺☻Smile.png 23:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. -Colors are a little too much on the new page. Some boxes are too big, and layout needs improvement. I like the current design. Jason Safoutin 23:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  6. I despise the "modern" palette of several intensities of pukey orange and blue, with a little pastel aquamarine. Give me fire-engine red, sun-yellow, forest-green, sky-and-sea-blue, royal purple .... —67-21-48-122 17:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  7. Bad layout, that other one. User:Zanimum

Ocenia vs Australia[edit]

Why are they both so special that they both get mainpage. shouldn't only oceania? Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 23:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

The reason there is a direct link to the Australian portal is because it is actively maintained, including lead stories, pictures, etc. The Oceania portal isn't. Also, in my opinion most residents of Oceania don't even realise that they're in it. - Borofkin 23:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
That makes sense. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 00:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I've noticed that the term "Australasia" is used a lot... Dan100 (Talk) 12:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

So what is it? Oceania(sp?) or Australia? -Edbrown05 12:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
The regions box on the left side of the Main Page goes by Oceania. -Edbrown05 12:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Neither word is ideal. Wikipedia says in w:Oceania: "The exact scope of Oceania is controversial, with varying interpretations including East Timor, Australia, and New Zealand.", and in w:Australasia: "From political and cultural perspectives, the word has little utility, as although Australia and New Zealand are both relatively wealthy, predominantly English-speaking countries and alike in many ways, they share little in common with the other nations in the area." The Wikipeda "Regions of the World" template lists Oceania as consisting of "Australasia · Melanesia · Micronesia · Polynesia · Pacific Rim." In sort, we should just stick with what we have, but accomodate links to Portals from the main page when appropriate. - Borofkin 23:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

why is there no yiddish edition[edit]

(had to inform you guys since wikipedia finaally added one)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

do it, call for a vote Jacques Divol
may i add that עמוד ראשי could answer better that question, no ? Jacques Divol 15:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Now that's value, upside down writing, huh? It's all yiddish to me. -Edbrown05 15:36, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I was under the impression that wikipedia had one for a long time. You can request a new eddition on meta. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 23:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

About Wikinews[edit]

What does "... build a website with present up-to-date, relevant, newsworthy and entertaining content ..." mean?  Present ... content?  I surmise it means "... build a website which presents up-to-date, relevant, newsworthy and entertaining content ...".  Or maybe it means "... build a website with up-to-date, relevant, newsworthy and entertaining content ...".  Please fix.
67-21-48-122 13:52, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I interpet that to mean wikt:present(adj #1) as in current, whats happening right now. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 23:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
"present up-to-date" might be ok grammar; but it is also redundant. --Meanmeancoffeebean 12:44, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I recommend we say "up-to-date" instead of "present up-to-date." --Meanmeancoffeebean 12:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh well, I don't really care either way. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 23:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

French social crisis[edit]

Nothing is on the main page about the largest social explosion in france since may 1968? The last time something of this scale happened there, Charles De Gaulles left the country! 3 million people on the streets in one day, and not a single word on the main page? Probably the most important event of the past months in Europe at the very least.--Che y Marijuana 11:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

France is a little country my friend.
but you'ld read :
5 articles on the subject, not bad.


one last thing : i don't know if your username is complying with wikinews charter ...
second think, yes i am living in France Jacques Divol 12:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
If you feel our coverage of france is too limited, feel free to help it by writing articles on the subject (just make sure their neutral and they will proably be published right away). Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 23:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Start a new article

Write.svg
Articles are written by readers like you!
To report on a news event, check if it is already being covered. If not, write a quick brief. For more guidance, see Wikinews:Writing an article. Got news, but no time to write a full article or a quick brief? Tell us what news you would like to see covered by Wikinews at Wikinews:Requested articles.

i cant find the amnesy international extraordinary rendition article.... and it was in the front page.....

I think you might of been thinking of wikipedia:'s in the news section. Although wikipedia and wikinews are related, they are seperate projects and arn't coridanted together (well not to that extent anyways) see Extraordinary rendition perhaps. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 22:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

wikinews:Syndication[edit]

Should we list this page on the main page? It needs a little updating, but could be useful. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 17:50, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Typo next to "list of new articles"[edit]

The main page says:

Check the list of new articles to if an article on the subject has been already started

It should say:

Check the list of new articles to see if an article on the subject has already been started

This is annoying, could someone with such power please fix it? LogicalDash 18:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

fixed. nice catch! :) Doldrums 19:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

US Federal Reserve raises interest rates - energy prices could affect inflation[edit]

If the abovelinked articel is old enough to be archived, why's it still listed on the Main Page (Outside the "Really old news")? It's listed under the "original research" section. Did I miss something? Thanx. 68.39.174.238 03:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

add it

Its there because of sorrowing lack of origional reporting. the list automaticly updates itself. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 01:33, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

If it bleeds, it leads[edit]

I'm most active on Wikipedia and Wiktionary, but I came to the Main Page today and saw this list of top headlines:

Interesting how even though this project is very different from conventional news sources, we seem to have fallen into the same mentality that the most important stories are the ones about death and destruction. Compare, by the way, the current top 5 "Most Emailed News" stories at Yahoo! News:

Perhaps the comparison is unfair, perhaps not. Something to think about, anyway. - dcljr 19:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Intreasting. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 19:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I Have noticed that before, it seems we do pefere writing about death and destruction Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 22:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

BREAKING NEWS! Amgine gets papercut while filing his tax return. More details soon... hey, like they say, it bleeds, it leads! :D —THIS IS MESSEDR with umlaut.pngOCKER (TALK) 22:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

BLAM! Woo, hoo hoo! Woo! Yeah...! That's... that's, woo... *wipes tear from eye, sighs* ... yeah. irid:t 22:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Thats important news, we better get in article up quick :P Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 22:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Layout Suggestion[edit]

Hi, I find the layout of the top most area of the page a waste of space. i.e. "Welcome to Wikinews, the free-content news source" and the following box. I suggest that this be made smaller, with the rss links elsewhere, to make way for some more news headlines. my $0.02202.7.183.131 12:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

:)[edit]

I have just been using Firefox for the first time ever, and I have noticed some diffences in the lay out of the site, for one, I did not notice untill now, that the TOC is on the right of this page:D back to IE in the morning :) Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 12:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Theres some different approaches at category:Sandbox You're free to create your own at user:202.7.183.131/main page redesign. ITs just hard to get everyone to agree. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 21:58, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

those darn flags[edit]

the flags accompanying the wikinews hotline numbers are two small, especially the EU flag, which is unidentifiable. suggest setting the two flag image sizes to say, 40px and replacing the image accompanying the "international" number with the Image:Wikinews-logo.png set to a similar size. Doldrums 07:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

You can always click on the flag. FellowWikiNews 4:10 pm, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay I changed them. They do look better. Still not sure of internations. heres other choices.

Wikinews.gifWikinews-logo.pngFlag of the United Nations.svgThe Blue Marble.jpgEarth flag PD.jpg. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 20:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

The flags look much better. The Flag of the United Nations.svg looks realy good. I also like The Blue Marble.jpg. FellowWikiNews 20:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thanks, bawolff. perhaps left align all three and change order? (will look like so.) no particular preference for the international image. all look good, but wikinews.gif is smaller than 40px, i think. Doldrums 12:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I personnally like it better centered. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 22:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit]

For some reason the WikiNews logo on the main page was flashing today. What hapend? FellowWikiNews 17:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, thats weird. I didn't see it. We also have a spiny logo (: Breaking.gif
It's the logo on the main page on top of the navigation. It flashed twice when I put my mouse on it. Mabie it's my computer.

FellowWikiNews 24:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

You spin me right round baby right round like a record baby right round round round! —THIS IS MESSEDR with umlaut.pngOCKER (TALK) 23:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
There is an odd bug in IE that radomly causes this, it will almost always go away after a short bit. --Cspurrier 14:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me that. FellowWikiNews 20:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Why are April 30 and May 01 exactly the same?[edit]

The exact same headlines are being shown for April 30 and May 1.

May 1

   * Comedians lampoon Bush at White House Correspondents' Dinner
   * Economist John Kenneth Galbraith dies
   * London Planetarium closes to make way for celebrity-themed show
   * Trapped Australian miners found alive
   * London hosts anti-racism concert ahead of local elections
   * Australian civil rights activists protest terror suspects' internment
   * Ten people injured as elderly driver hits crowd at Australian show
   * Kidnapped Indian engineer killed by Taliban
   * Hawaii legislature reaches agreement to suspend gasoline price cap

April 30

   * Comedians lampoon Bush at White House Correspondents' Dinner
   * Economist John Kenneth Galbraith dies
   * London Planetarium closes to make way for celebrity-themed show
   * Trapped Australian miners found alive
   * London hosts anti-racism concert ahead of local elections
   * Australian civil rights activists protest terror suspects' internment
   * Ten people injured as elderly driver hits crowd at Australian show
   * Kidnapped Indian engineer killed by Taliban
   * Hawaii legislature reaches agreement to suspend gasoline price cap
Fixed. Thanks for the heads-up. --Deprifry|+T+ 07:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Newsroom[edit]

Smooth looking page, informative, and a great addition to 'navigation'. -Edbrown05 10:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

What about that new genus of crickets?

If it's new, it ought to be reported :) Edbrown05 07:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean? FellowWikiNews 20:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

A new initiative of the Conservative Party from Romania[edit]

   PARTNERSHIP FOR PROSPERITY       

Partnership for Prosperity means the building up of strong and competitive able to concretely sustain the integration in the European Union.

The idea publicly developed by the Conservative Party is based upon a simple truth: in order to receive, you have to give. Consequently, Romania will have to contribute to the budget of the European Union, so that eventually it can benefit from the advantages of being a member of the European Union.

In our opinion, the 1st of January 2007, stands for a historic change of national effort of prosperity for Romania, not for a great dole of prosperity without work and labour.

In this respect, we regard as essential a partnership between the poor and the middle and upper class.

You can read more about this on our page at the following adress: www.partidulconservator.ro

Controversy over translation of Norwegian national anthem[edit]

I cited sources for this story, and removed the cite tag. Also cleaned up some POV and grammar in the story. However, it still shows up in the Disputed Stories section. How can I move it? I don't see any other tags in the story. Thanks. Aaron Winborn 14:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Never mind; it seems to be okay now. Was it proper to keep it May 16, rather than moving it to today's date? I'm still learning protocol. Wish the original author had cited it; such an easy thing to have done. Aaron Winborn 14:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
For now, changed it to May 19, since that's our date of publication. I assume that's correct, from how other stories have been published. Feel free to correct it if I'm doing the wrong thing. Aaron Winborn 14:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
The date should be the date of publication, unless there is a good reason to do otherwise. --Cspurrier 14:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Google News?[edit]

Does Google News pick up articles from Wikinews? --Bergen County 15:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

no, they don't. i once submitted wikinews for thier review and Google responded with an email saying "We're unable to include sites that don't have a formal editorial-review process." have been meaning to bring this up for discussion at the water cooler ... Doldrums 15:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
That discussion has already happened in the past (looking for linky). They do pick up a site who mirrors us however. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 19:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
now that we can accredited reporters, maybe we can a similar set of accredited editorial reviewers too, i wonder if this will satisfy google. but my fear is that google wants the editorial review team tootake legal responsibility for what is published here, which i suppose is too much to ask of individual wikinewsies. Doldrums 20:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Others have worked with Google on this, but basically they want pages locked before they will include it in Google news. --Cspurrier 20:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
and yet how many times do see on google news Update9:blahblahblah.?
No, they don't. There are probably a couple of mirror sites. FellowWikiNews 14:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Higher percentage of published articles about Aus / NZ[edit]

Is it just me or do there seem to be a higgher number of published articles about Austrailia and New Zealand recently? Don't know if its because the area is in the news more or if AUS/NZ wikinewsians are writing/collaberating more of the stories. --Mitrebox 15:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The project has a significant number of Oz/NZ contributors, and news from that part of the world seems to be less subject to controversy arising from polarized politics. Basically, good on the Auzzies and Kiwis for giving their part of the world effective coverage. If your neck of the woods isn't so well covered, then start writing. :-) --Brian McNeil / talk 17:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Really, I thought it evened out a bit compared to a while ago. We also just recently had a contributor come back from australia who was very active for a short period of time, but unfourtanatly has decided to either leave, or hopefully just take a break. (Don't want to go into details about that right now). Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 19:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

They are government hired. Its part of the plan to increase the Australia and New Zealand dollar. 203.158.34.114 03:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

naming convention[edit]

you guys really need to have a naming convention on including the country(ies) involved in the head line of the text. I mean Left parties: Don't let U.S meddle in India's internal affairs - where? Mother charged with manslaughter - where? Steel major Arcelor ready to reconsider Mittal's offer - where? is it sport or what? Student faces expulsion over blog post - you get my point.

We do — Wikinews:Naming conventions. We just don't always follow them. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 16:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Pope[edit]

No article on the Pope's visit to Poland and to John Paul II's hometown? Every news source is covering this! :)

Well, this is Wikinews, so feel free to write something on that! -- IlyaHaykinson 18:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
The article is right here [1]. FellowWikiNews 13:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

congressman william jefferson[edit]

there is news about this guy today. it didn't break today. is there a wikinews article abuot this story? if not, there should be. Kzzl 20:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

You can write about it. Ask me on my talk if you need help. FellowWikiNews 00:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Header[edit]

The message at the top (Consider entering...) has an error. It should be "There are" not "There's". If you are an admin here please correct it at MediaWiki:Anonnotice. Thank you! -m:User:Dbmag9

Help![edit]

Someone vandilized the main page! Please help! What happend? FellowWikiNews 00:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

All I saw is the daily story list seemed messed up. MessedRocker was editing it earlier, maybe s/he knows. Fixed now. Could also be a bot malfunction (I think we use bots for that) Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 00:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I believe it was User:Craig's Bot. For somereason thought June 0 and June -1 were a couple days ago as oposed to may 30. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 00:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
It is a bug in my bot, it believes the day before June 1 is June 0 and before that June -1. This bug has been fixed, but since it generated these pages with the bug in place it is quickest to just fix it by hand. --Cspurrier 01:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The main page is still wrong. FellowWikiNews 01:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
It should be fixed now. —THIS IS MESSEDR with umlaut.pngOCKER (TALK) 01:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Try going to http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Main_Page&action=purge and/or doing a hard refresh.
That does not help. The main page has May 31 twice. Am I the only one who is having this problem? FellowWikiNews 01:43, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't see that. Should be fixd now. Are you experiancing any redlinks still? Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 03:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

News of British Culture[edit]

Yesterday I've been to the concert at Barbican. Coming to the concert, I saw the wooden sculpture dedicated to the composer Felix Mendelsohn Bartoldi vandalised - it was knocked down and some fragments were brocken into pieces. It was a 500 year old birch tree and it was indicated that Mendelsohn liked to sit near composing his music. (86.5.87.240 23:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC))(Meladina 23:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC))

Censorship once again: jews are sacred cow[edit]

The entire world press is full of reports on how israeli navy artillery shelled the Gaza seashore and killed 3 women plus 7 children sunbathing on the muslim rest day of friday. PLO wants UN security council to convene in emergency session. Hamas says they will take out a jewish articulated bus in revenge, because the attack means war and thus end of ceasefire. Where is this mentioned on wikinews?

Start an article about it. I dont think anyone done it yet. Create an user if you like. Happy editing international 14:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

NPOV! The news sources are Hamas controled.

Suprisingly the jewish train wreck got immediately reported on Wikinews, even though it had only 5 dead, while the jewish navy beach shelling had 8 palestinians killed. This is a big weakness of wikinews, as most contributors are yankee and so they only reports what they like, like pro-zionist content. For-profit news agencies at least must report on every significant even, even if they report in a highly biased way. But wikinews attitude is censorship. There should be a rule that any news must not be reported before previous events get a write-up. This way yankee could not omit news they do not like from reporting!

Articles[edit]

Right now I always see on Talk:Main Page: Where is this mentioned on Wikinews? Create an account and start writing! FellowWikiNews 22:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I do not understand the grammer of your sentence/What??? please rephrase. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 22:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Please be civil.

Snow in New Zealand[edit]

New Zealand has been hit by a huge amount of snow and it is still continuing. Up to a half-metre of snow is expected to fall.

Well, a quick look outside indicates to me that there is no snow in Wellington.

Article move[edit]

Hi, I have changed the name of the Australia/England rugby article, could an admin please fix the article name on the front page, even though it is a redirect, I would rather it had its proper name on the main page. Thanks. Fy2006 13:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Unless it is a lead, it will update automatically. To update leads you can use the links to the right --Cspurrier 14:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Sports Heavy[edit]

Over the last 3 weeks, the rss feed and main page have been very very sports heavy. There needs to be a way to customise rss feeds, and main page views ALA google news. I don't want to see ANY sports stories, I am sure there are a number of others tired of the constant parade of sports stories. -- User:aenertia ~16:00 19th June 2006

Me too. FellowWikiNews 17:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I second that. Sports? 70.245.128.135 23:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

North Korean Missile[edit]

I'm surpised there's no mention of the possiblity of a missile test from the North Koreans. Maybe it's something that should be added. 69.118.136.197 06:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. Anyone can create and edit articles on Wikinews. You are welcome to write an article on the North Korean missile issue yourself. Have a read of Wikinews:Writing an article, and feel free to ask if you have any questions. - Borofkin 07:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
They just launched three missiles today and it is not front page. Should not someone get around to this? /wikipedia editor Ihmhi, --69.116.69.183 21:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Good to see Dubya supressed on Wikinews.[edit]

Tyrannus Dubya has arrived in Budapest yesterday to healthy booing and today he is supposed to have a very important speech about what he thinks freedom should be like. Hope this time he will not mix up the 1848 and the 1956 hungarian revolutions... It will go on all CNN live, anyhow. 195.70.32.136 12:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think its "suppression" so much as noone's bothered to write about it here. If he DOES make (another) verbal screwup then I suspect it'll end up here. In any case, I advise against making scurrilious commentary on public figures here, noone likes it (publicly). 68.39.174.238 11:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

What would work best for the Main Page?[edit]

scrapping the left side of it (which is basically worthless in my opinion) and scrapping the right side of the page (which is basically worthless (stop) no, that's where there's something happening), or scrap it all. [scrap it all] -Edbrown05 12:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

If the left side of the Main Page was reduced to to one link, and then started again from there, I'd say keep it 'Recent changes' as the only link. Then what's important to left side of the Main Page would be addded from that. Kill the Main Page, it's the only way it can be re-built-Edbrown05 13:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Throw the piece of crap out the window and start from nothing. -Edbrown05 13:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
So you're saying I should go and use my super magical admin powers and delete the main page. Somehow in the process of rebuilding it when we have nothing, I don't think it'll go over well. Lets start again on a different page. how about a subpage of the main page, or a sub page of a user talk page. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 19:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
The left hand bar is kinda instrumental to any wiki - it is how you navigate around. As for the right side - I think the layout is fine as it is but the structure of articles could be updated. Here is a good idea: User:Messedrocker/Yet_another_Main_Page_design that I think will work really well --Skenmy(talk)|(ideas) 17:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Just letting the people know, I am currently redesigning the yet another main page design to make it look better and less clutterous. It'll look very good, especially since I intend on using a template I kidnapped stole borrowed from Italian Wikipedia. —THIS IS MESSEDR with umlaut.pngOCKER (TALK) 02:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
By the way in case you want it, see a whole bunch in Category:Sandbox. I think if we scrapped the sidebar in favout of DV's design, it'd be cool. You could proabaly do that if you modify the CSS, JS, as well as stuff in mediaWiki: land. But it'd be hackish, and proablly break a lot. Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 19:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
The top-right corner of the MainPage is too visibly valuable and redundant (that content presented there is currently listed in the left column). The "Start an article" box is ugly, but probably a good candidate to take its place. -Edbrown05 02:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
a short quip, from the wikinews mission statement in the top-right corner of main page. -Edbrown05 04:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
oops, i forgot that the mission statement is f**ked up. -Edbrown05 04:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
We should really revisit our mission statement, its too vague *hapiness for all* type document that no one reads or pays attention to. We need an acurate to the point mission statement that the comunity believes 100%. (IMHO) . Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 05:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Possible picture for something. used for new article on de:.

Israel pushes into the Gaza Strip[edit]

I believe that the mobilization of Israeli forces into the Gaza Strip should make the front page, as it is most certainly an extention of the earlier story about Galid Shalit, the kidnapped Israeli soldier. And if there is a story about North Korea's intention to launch their new TDG-2 missile. They HAVE already fueled it, and it is a painstaking process to extract fuel from ICBMs. Both of these things are more newsworthy than Axel Rose being arrested.

Be Bold If you feel that it should be there, the best way to make it happen is an edit button. (By the way published stories should automaticly go mainpage. Unless you mean the one's in big descript. for thoose see the lead links in the top right of this talk page). Happy editing user:Bawolff

Developing articles in its own box[edit]

Hey, I was being bold and I moved the developing articles (plus disputed articles) into its own box, because before there was a giant whitespace and I was looking to eliminate that. Is it okay? —THIS IS MESSEDR with umlaut.pngOCKER (TALK) 04:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me.... R2b2 04:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I like having developing & disputed down at the bottom in parallel columns. Nyarlathotep 09:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed it today, and I think that it's a good idea. FellowWikiNews 23:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

More Gaza news[edit]

[2] !!! 203.214.133.79 11:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

We should have a countdown till America declears war. 20 warheads is no joke! 203.214.133.79 11:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism by main page editor[edit]

Please remove the lines

July 0

July 0 is my favorite day July -1

Wikinews:2006/July/-1 July -2

Wikinews:2006/July/-2

This is not actually vandalism, but a bug in the bot that generates this (and someone being silly with July 0). (It works by count five days back, so before the 5th it creates odd results)-Cspurrier 03:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

World cup[edit]

There are three articles that are the same.

Italy wins World Cup on penalties
Italy wins 2006 World Cup in penalties
France and Italy deadlocked at 1-1

Please delete these articles and just keep one. —FellowWikiNews (W) 20:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikibooks is 3 years old today!![edit]

Today, July 10th, is Wikibooks' third birthday. We have a notice up on our b:Main Page. It would be great if someone could also put up an announcement here. (Though I'd like to be bold, I don't know the etiquette for updating the main page and want to tread lightly) Kellen T 82.32.2.47 14:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

How about not? We're kind of our own project here, distinct from Wikibooks. —this is messedr͏̈ocker (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Mmmm not asking for a huge banner, it's just a notable wikimedia-related event. Granted, not as big as a million WP articles or anything, but just sayin. KellenT 82.32.2.47 20:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
You asked the same question here. Where is it on Wikipedia? I guess nobody wanted to put it on the main page of Wikipedia. We are distinct from Wikibooks. I don't see it on any other wiki site. FellowWikiNews (W) 21:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
An article about it would be appropriate, but we do not generally modify the main page for events. We did not even have a notice up when Wikinews turned 1.--Cspurrier 21:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, yes, that is the result I was hoping for; I can see how that might not have been clear. Forgive me if I came off as presumptuous, but I was trying to get the word out to our sister projects quickly when it looked like other wikibookians had dropped the ball. I'm also a bit taken aback at the snippiness here considering I brought news in good faith from a sister project; a bit more of a tap in the right direction from the standpoint of wikinews would have been appreciated. KellenT 82.32.2.47 21:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Part of the reason why you got such snippiness, was many people believe that Wikinews is for Wikipedia's press releases. This impression was not helped by a news paper article that kind of labeled us as such. We are most definitely not a place for Wikipedia or Wikimedia's press releases, though we should and do occasionally cover major events that occur in the other Wikimedia projects.--Cspurrier 22:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Manhattan Building Collapse[edit]

On the main page, it says the building was 3 stories tall, but the article and everything else I've read says it was a 4-story building. It's not really that important, but for the sake of continuity I think someone should change it, and I don't know how to edit something on the main page.--130.39.163.76 01:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I've changed it now - you can find a link to update the "second lead" (which is where that's article is sitting) on the Wikinews:Workspace page... --R2b2 01:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Pig picture on mainpage[edit]

How did that get there? Ealturner 17:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)