Talk:Wikinews visits the Pacific Orchid Exposition

OR Notes

Me and Guillom were there. Pictures were taken, people were talked to, yada yada. --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 01:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Review of revision 969967 [Failed]

Revision 969967 of this article has been reviewed by Benny the mascot (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 03:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Your OR notes seem inadequate. Please provide the source for this statement: "This year's theme for the expo's displays was "carnival" although a number of the winning entries were among the smaller and more sedate species of orchids, quite at odds with the typical ostentatious colors and displays of carnival." NPOV: Passed Style: Not ready: Same sentence mentioned above seems too long. Try breaking it up a little. Comments by reviewer: Overall a quite refreshing article! It just needs some clarifications and style fixes before it's ready for publication. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 969967 of this article has been reviewed by Benny the mascot (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 03:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Your OR notes seem inadequate. Please provide the source for this statement: "This year's theme for the expo's displays was "carnival" although a number of the winning entries were among the smaller and more sedate species of orchids, quite at odds with the typical ostentatious colors and displays of carnival." NPOV: Passed Style: Not ready: Same sentence mentioned above seems too long. Try breaking it up a little. Comments by reviewer: Overall a quite refreshing article! It just needs some clarifications and style fixes before it's ready for publication. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Here is the awards table. My OR notes might be inadequate, but I assure you... the pictures speak for themselves. What do you want me to source? The make and model of orchid? --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 06:06, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Your OR notes indicate that you interviewed people at the expo, so something in this article came from an interview, right? Since everything else can be sourced by the website, I can only conclude that someone else told you that "a number of the winning entries were among the smaller and more sedate species of orchids, quite at odds with the typical ostentatious colors and displays of carnival." The sentence reads more like an opinion rather than a statement of fact, which is why we need to know its source. Benny the mascot (talk) 12:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

"Talked to" != "interviewed". Just for the record. --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 17:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Review of revision 970032 [Passed]

Revision 970032 of this article has been reviewed by Tristan Thomas (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 12:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Very nice pictures. Shak is a trusted user, so I'll believe the plants are the plants you say they are, as I have absolutely no idea! 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 970032 of this article has been reviewed by Tristan Thomas (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 12:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Very nice pictures. Shak is a trusted user, so I'll believe the plants are the plants you say they are, as I have absolutely no idea! 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.

He may be trusted, but he doesn't claim any expertise in orchids. Benny the mascot (talk) 13:09, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

He went to the thingy. I assume he either talked to the people in question, or read a sign, or something of that nature. I don't think one needs to be an expert on the subject matter in question to report on it. Bawolff ☺☻ 17:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

(e/c) You are cruising for a bruising. #1 - It is possible I WROTE down what I took a picture of. What would you like me to do, take a picture/scan of a sheet of paper that says "7076 - Dracula Robledrum" and similar? I mean, I could, if I had wrote them down. It still wouldn't have done you any good because you have no way of knowing the original file serial number for this picture. #2 - I don't claim to be an expert in anything, but I have written about air planes which I'm not an expert on either. I've been known to get a label wrong before, I don't claim to be perfect, you know better, ya fix it - it is a wiki after all. Even still I spent a good 20 minutes staring at this guide to figure out which H-53 my CH-53 was. #3 - As you can kinda see here and clearly see here. Each and EVERY SINGLE orchid at that show was labeled. If they didn't have their name, they had a numerical tag which corresponded to a key. I made sure to take a picture of every tag with orchid. I could upload those pictures too to prove it, but most of the time you can't tell what tag goes with what orchid unless you happen to have all the original files sitting in front of you. --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 17:41, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok...but I'm still lost as to how you arrived at the following statement: "a number of winning entries were among the smaller and more sedate species of orchids, quite at odds with the typical ostentatious colors and displays of carnival." Why can the winners be seen as "sedate"? For what reasons do you consider "carnival" to typically involve ostentatious colors and displays? How do you even conclude that some of the winners, by virtue of being small and sedate, are atypical of a carnival theme? The source, or even the logic, you used to make that statement is horribly unclear and is my main reason for failing this article.

BTW, the article was passed with a sentence fragment in it: "Though a number of the winning entries were among the smaller and more sedate species of orchids, quite at odds with the typical ostentatious colors and displays of carnival". Amgine decided to fix it (thank you!) but joined the very sentences I wanted separated! Does anyone not understand the reasons I failed this article??? Benny the mascot (talk) 22:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Benny, stop being an arse.    Tris   22:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I am quite offended by that... Benny the mascot (talk) 22:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

No. It is quite obvious that no one see's the reason you failed an article that is... wait for it.... 3 sentences. I'll fess up, my grammar is not good, that's why I generally call in a copy editor on this. He didn't feel it was run-on as you did, fine. This is one of those things that you simply fix and move on. I tried, obviously it wasn't acceptable and Amgine fixed it. Great! We're a wiki, that's what we are here for. Even CNN will update their articles after publication. As for the carnival issue, have you READ the w:Carnival article? Or know anything about it? The word "colorful" is used half a dozen places on that page. Granted, not every country celebrates carnival in such an ostentatious manner, but it is quite obvious the expo was going for that colorful and celebratory manner. It was mentioned off hand from one of the people whom walked me in the door that while many displays were "showy" that wasn't necessarily representative of all orchids. Though that fact was readily apparent to me, the non-expert. Showing off != informational (in most cases). In the end, you could not find me one person that SERIOUSLY believes that an orchid flower that is LESS than 1 cm in size is anywhere remotely ostentatious (short of possibly a Buddhist monk). If you don't like the terminology I used because you feel it is too "unbiased", flipping change it - but remember - you passed the NPOV section on review.

I have covered a number of events in the past and never had this sort of issue before. YES, THERE IS SUBJECTIVITY. Without a hard scientific study (IE counting every attendee and their dresS) there is no way to prove "Cosplaying is not an uncommon occurrence for this convention's attendees". It is subjective, but not unbiased. Where's the "backup"? Me! That is what the {{original}} tag is for. I'm sorry if maybe someone neglected to explain this to you when you got editor, but having my name on Wikinews:Credential verification means that I get a little latitude and trust in my original reporting. --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 23:47, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

If you had just included that in your OR notes, then everything would have been fine. Benny the mascot (talk) 00:42, 4 March 2010 (UTC)