User:DragonFire1024/archiveOct07-Jan08

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

Vandalism removed[edit]

But feel free to take a look if you want. irid t i e 05:20, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Edbrown05 Request for ArbCom[edit]

I've proposed a request for arbcom relating to the recent situation with Ed. If you take issue with being listed as an involved party, please remove your name from that list. Otherwise, I suppose you'll be expected to make a brief statement on that page. irid t i e 07:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Userpage Sharing Project[edit]

You've been added as a member of the Userpage Sharing Project. You were added by me because I needed people to test the template with. If you wish to be removed, please contact me here. If not, please add {{User:Thunderhead/sharing}} to the top of your userpage (or wherever you want to stick it. Thanks, Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 22:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikinews:Protected deletions/auto[edit]

Wikinews:Protected deletions/auto is supposed to be used sparingly: Please only list articles here if they are either offensive or have been created more than once. The "Aaron stafford" pages do not seem to qualify. --SVTCobra 13:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Serious Vandalism in progress[edit]

Omegaspoom needs immediate blocking. JoshuaZ 01:59, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Beat me to it :-P DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, well someone still needs to delete the bad redirects... JoshuaZ 02:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Done DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Crude oil prices template[edit]

Love it! --David Shankbone 03:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Taser death at Vancouver Airport[edit]

It is a real news event and there was a source. Why did you delete it? FellowWiki Newsie 17:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Because it was an empty article more than 2 days old. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah. I forgot to check that. FellowWiki Newsie 23:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Np :) DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion on FEMA employees pose as fake reporters during press conference‎[edit]

There's this new developement but the article was published 3 days ago, so I don't know if this should be included in the same article or as possibly a short followup. JoshuaZ 01:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Alum Rock Earthquake[edit]

wtf deleted earthquake page? 76.226.122.126 03:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

See: 5.6 earthquake strikes California. Sorry. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 03:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Latest trial of the One Laptop Per Child running in India; Uraguay orders 100,000 machines[edit]

Could you help me with that material? :) Przykuta 13:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I've tidied up the start of this, but by copying the entire report over the big issue is actually changing from first person narrative to a newsie style. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Updated title again. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Permanent ban[edit]

Probably for this IP: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/77.101.38.46 --David Shankbone 00:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hi!

I have question for you: Why do you deleted my password Braceface comeback polish Zigzap? Today is cartoon, stayed to emited in polish Zigzap. I'm waiting for your answer.Prasuk 18:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello. It's my again. Why do you deleted my password Braceface comeback polish Zigzap. citation:

19:53, 4 November 2007 DragonFire1024 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Braceface comeback polish Zigzap" ‎ (content was: {{cleanup|where to start? Missing date template, can't follow up on content of Polish source for further details. Doesn't read like a news report}}Ca...').

I'm waiting for your answer. Nice dayPrasuk 07:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

:)!!![edit]

The day has come!!!--MarkTalk to me 17:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

12 'fire bombs' found inside Buffalo, New York apartment house[edit]

User:Jlwbflo has disputed the accuracy of your article. Can you please check your sources/anonymous witness again. --SVTCobra 19:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Please see Talk:12 'fire bombs' found inside Buffalo, New York apartment house#Accuracy dispute: --SVTCobra 19:17, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
The complaints are ongoing. I have left the article up this time, but you should probably review the collaboration page Talk:12 'fire bombs' found inside Buffalo, New York apartment house. Cheers, --SVTCobra 00:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
If you are calm enough perhaps you could respond to User:Jlwbflo on the user's talk page. I have left a few messages there, but I feel like a go-between. It is obviously someone who is not used to navigating Wikinews. But if you need the buffer, I can do that too. I just say this because it does not appear to be a random troll, but rather someone from Buffalo, who has taken great exception to the article. I could be wrong. --SVTCobra 01:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
What else can I do? DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

DHS: al-Qaeda and Hezbollah planning to attack U.S. within three years[edit]

I would change that title, (CYA). --SVTCobra 03:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiLeaks[edit]

I have great appreciation for the reporting you are doing. It's difficult to write OR stories, and I think the ones you have been working on are admirable. Some of my critiques of Wikinews have been centered around us "adding something" to the Internet that is found anywhere else--not everything we do, though need be that--and that's what you are doing, and I think it's good. We'll stumble along the way, and I have done so in my interviews, but it's a learning process. --David Shankbone 15:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Crude Oil Prices[edit]

I think it is time to revisit if this should be on the main page. It has not been updated for days now. Did you have any success in finding someone to make a bot for updating? --SVTCobra 14:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately I have not :(I will ask Zach if he will...But no luck otherwise :( DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Jurock has just (literally minutes ago) taken an interest in this template. I'll link it Template:Crude Oil Prices. He was a bit bold (per our mantra) and restructured the thing, but I think it may be easier to update now. Take a look at it. --SVTCobra 01:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Oil and stuff[edit]

Well I was updating it as much I could, but I started a new job and not a lot of time.

Please, my comment (just above that) wasn't -I mean- it wasn't incriminating... In Spanish Wikinews I constantly update the markets and well, I do it via BBC News's data, even though it hasn't got the most updated prices (10-15 min delay). What I meant is: there is no actual need to use the original sources when other sources are equally reliable (such as Bloomberg and BBC News and Yahoo! Finances). Sorry if it was incriminating. Hey! After all nobody pays us... =P - Jurock (reply) 01:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright[edit]

Only the coin image was, afaik, created by the FBI. They copied the GLogo pendant off https://laboutiquebleue.webbleu.net/, and the CLogo off http://clogo.org/main.php. The GLogo image is not free use. IdiotVictim 06:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

All images were taken as part of their investigation. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 06:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
They were not. The CLogo image was created by Norbert de Jonge, trademarked and released under GFDL, and GLogo pendan photo was taken by la Boutique BLeue. (The latter is apparent in that the Boutique Bleue's version of the photo is higher resolution and not marked on.) IdiotVictim 07:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Blog layout[edit]

I'd like to discuss the blog layout, so I set up a page: Wikinews:Blog, please reply on the talk page. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 09:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

For your help on Sharpton :-) --David Shankbone 15:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Striking comments.[edit]

Sorry if I was coming as rude, but I was reading at the water cooler and caught the suggestion of striking offensive material as opposed to deleting it. Perhaps I will have more discussion with the folks at the water cooler to create consensus before performing any further strikes. VaporOne 00:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Is there any other places that are trying to address "flaming." I feel flaming degrades the free speech area, but also do not want to create problems. Is there a special topic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by VaporOne (talkcontribs) 00:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Camp Delta SOP[edit]

I hope that you understand, that when I am being harshly critical of an article, such as this, I am trying to make sure that what we publish here isn't fluff or crap. I want it to stand up to a test of legitimacy, so I challenge anything I feel that is not properly sourced or noted. Better me than someone from the "outside" is my thinking. I am not singling you out and I still think Russian opposition presents alleged evidence of election fraud is a crappy article (one with which you had nothing to do). --SVTCobra 02:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Technical problem/water cooler[edit]

I bring this discussion to your attention because I mention DHS video confirms details of leaked internal memo on al-Qaeda threat, and more in it. It is about non-http protocols. Please see Technical: non http protocols. Cheers, --SVTCobra 02:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Editorial Cleanup for Two Hikers Found Dead[edit]

This article definitely needs cleanup but improvement may be easier if you stated reasons, in detail, the talk page, although nominating it for clean up is a good start as it brings the fact it is not ready to editors attention. --Anonymous101 17:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:000 0296.JPG[edit]

Please consider relicensing this image as you have done with all the other photos of this storm. Regards. Adambro 00:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Internet dangerous[edit]

Did you really give Prasuk a fair shake by deleting this so quickly? I know, he is often a bother, to me it seemed he was working on something with this. Well, whatever. --SVTCobra 02:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually I didn't see the OR tag there...so I apologize and restored. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
And not a bother...just eager and ready...much like me when I started here. The language barrier doesn't help...but I read some of it and agree...he seems to really be working on something. I got caught up in the deletion moment. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Your comment[edit]

I want to know if wikinews will let me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardkselby (talkcontribs) 20:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Lakota[edit]

This Lakota Group Breaks from U.S. was already in development, but since you published, I'll propose it merge into your article. Cheers, --SVTCobra 00:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanks, DF, for jumping in to help! Cheers, Jcart1534 20:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Reliable sources ... wikinews[edit]

Hi, thank you for defending Wikinews in the Wikipedia discussion, however, truth be told, our requirements for OR notes are poorly enforced. I have seen OR notes that amounted to "I saw this on TV" etc. This stuff is not verifiable, nor are interview notes that amount to "this interview took place face-to-face". I therefore hope to disuade you from arguing that this type of reporting amounts to something verifiable, and ask you to first consider Jimbo's "best-practices" idea that he presented here on Wikinews. Cheers. --SVTCobra 01:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

We have that, likely spread around in policies and such. I can say the style guide, accreditation policy, Welcome messages, etc etc...maybe it does need to be centralized. But point is, I am sick of WP and the sme excuses. We are as verifiable as anyone else if not more so. And if I ever see a I saw it on TV thing other than a press conference, which watching on v is like attending. And I would belive my word on that or yours over an anonymous user or new user. So the verifiability excuse is lame and getting old IMO. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, I agree with Jimbo and sure we can do that, but lets be honest, is that going to make the least bit of difference in terms of WP? DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Maybe you and I would believe eachother when we say we saw it on TV, but why would anyone else in the world? They don't understand our special relationship. Furthermore, it is no one else can go back and verify it. Further, believe it or not MSM has full-time people that are there to verify the stuff that they print or air. We don't exactly have that, so to say our stuff is as good or better rings kinda hollow. But in response to your followup about Jimbo's proposal, yes, yes I believe it will. An article that is archived and tagged "This article followed Best Practices" would be considered good enough to use as a reliable source on Wikipedia. --SVTCobra 02:05, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
If we have to wait 2 weeks or more just to have US as a source on WP just to wait for an article to be protected, its not worth it. We are more reliable in terms of in depth OR reporting tan ANY MSM , IMO. And the WMF COO is a prime example. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:06, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
If we follow our own archiving polices, it would just be 36 hours, we just have a back-log. And really the COO story was broken by The Register, we just confirmed that they weren't lying and we sourced everything. But the problem lies with truly OR stories that have no other source that the particular Wikinewsie that is writing it. That is what needs transparency/verifiability. --SVTCobra 02:14, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Users like Me Shankbone etc go through lots of trouble to research online and through personal research to get stories. Remember we are not a joe schmo. We are accredited Wikinewsies. Trusted users. I would agree more if this were about anyone else other than users like us. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:16, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
If I may just jump in here with a trivial bit of info. The archiving policy is, "Any article which is published and dated no less than seven days from the current date should be archived per the process described below. Articles which have been published for more than 36 hours should not undergo significant edits..." Cheers and Merry Christmas! Jcart1534 02:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
As always Jcart is right; but still after 36 hours articles should get protected. --SVTCobra 02:28, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I have seen the Accredation Requests, they are not that hard to get. And again, I must ask, why would anyone outside of Wikinews trust them? --SVTCobra 02:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Dragon, are other accredited reporters lesser than you and Shankbone? Or would you agree that info from BrockF5 (talk · contribs) is immediately fit for inclusion in Wikipedia encyclopedic articles? Just asking. --SVTCobra 02:28, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
BTW, BrockF5 provides the best OR notes of anyone. He even scans his handwritten notes and uploads them. --SVTCobra 02:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I gave names off the top of my head because they are involved in the debate. I didn't give names to single anyone out. It was purely for examples only and I resent the insinuation. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
And some of us don't have that kind of technological advantage, but does not make us any less to be trusted. BTW. Of all the interviews I did, I have e-mails, and also 90% are on audip tape if you would like me to send them. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
What tech advantage? A scanner? So what? Type up your notes. The fact is that when OR "materials" are not in the OR notes, it leaves outsiders wondering. They should not have to ask for someone to e-mail it to them. --SVTCobra 03:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I do well with my notes thank you. And whether I type them out or not will make no difference to WP. I make a point to do good OR notes. And again I resent the insinuation that I don't. I don't have a scanner and if I could spend the money on one I would. I also have no means to upload my tapes. Wish did, because I have about 15 tapes, front and back. I love listening to them because its my best work. I wish someone else could enjoy that pleasure. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 03:05, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I know ... you are probably the most earnest Wikinewsie we have. The point is not your notes or BrockF5's notes or David Shankbone's notes, but we do let other stories get published with poor notes. Quite a few of them in fact. Here's a recent one: New mall in Washington, US almost complete, traffic a concern (and this is just one). This is not from an accredited Wikinewsie, not even a regular contributor, yet it got published. That, I think, is why your calls to Wikipeida about Wikinews being such a reliable source ring hollow. BTW, Jason, Merry Christmas. --SVTCobra 03:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

New line. Same to you :) BTW I have been very busy. If I had noticed that story at the time, I definotely would not have let it slip past with that little of notes. That's just unacceptable. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 03:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Please keep discussion on this issue restricted to the appropriate Water cooler section. Thanks! --Brian McNeil / talk 11:17, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikinews on Wikipedia[edit]

Don't make edits like this as it makes it impossible to follow the discussion. Comments should be chronological. Adambro 11:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Nice work![edit]

Hi DragonFire. Just wanted to say I really enjoyed the tiger article. Very well written. Cheers, Jcart1534 14:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion[edit]

Hi, if you address the worker/visitor issue in this first tiger story, I'll develop the Seattle shooting. Cheers, --SVTCobra 00:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

If you re-read it, you'll see that it says both. It should say one or the other or it should state it is unclear. But both sources say visitor, at least in the headline, and our title says worker (Mercury asked for login). --SVTCobra 01:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I am lost as to where is says both? You mean title too? DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Title says "worker", paragraph 1 says "worker", paragraph 2 says "visitor", paragraph 3 says "patron", paragraph 4 says "worker" - that's what I mean by says both. I am done with the Seattle story, so it is all yours. However, one of you edits claimed there were arrests, I didn't see that in the sources so I removed that. Cheers, --SVTCobra 01:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I clarified as much as I could, but earlier reports were that it was two visitors and a worker that were injured/killed. And if you search google news there is a recent article, including the seattle times, where there aer at least two arrested. CNN too. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Lakota e-mail you got from SD[edit]

Regarding the e-mail you posted on wikinews, This is not a State Department issue. what??? Shouldn't it be? If the Lakota are going to be visiting foreign embassies, talking about their treaties with the US, that sounds like State Department business!

Just wanted to comment on that. ;) Schwael 18:43, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, is the e-mail you received citable as a source? It might be useful for wikipedia:Republic of Lakotah. --wikipedia:User:Stlemur 06:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.149.157 (talk)

I'm thinking of adding a "response" section; it would be nice to be able to say "the State Department considers the subject a matter for the Department of Interior" or the like. --wikipedia:User:Stlemur 12:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.149.157 (talk)

E-mail me the letter via the "e-mail this user" on my wikipedia user page? -wikipedia:User:Stlemur 12:48, 18:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.149.157 (talk)

Ah, makes sense. I'm at eschluessel at gmail dot com. -wikipedia:User:Stlemur 19:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.149.157 (talk)

One other thing I've noticed that's odd...the republicoflakotah and lakotaoyate sites have exactly the same news releases up to 24-12-2007 on them, except the contact info on the republicoflakotah ones have all been changed. I'm in touch with Naomi Archer of lakotaoyate about this and should be hearing more on the subject tomorrow. I've e-mailed republicoflakotah as well but so far nothing. --Stlemur 01:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Pakistani general election in jeopardy[edit]

Hello there DragonFire1024: Thank you so much for looking over the news item that I wrote, and for tagging it for cleanup. I am sorry that it didn't meet Wikinews's standards of NPOV and I confess I am a little puzzled -- I"m an admin on the English Wikipedia where we do take NPOV extremely seriously as I'm sure you're aware, and I read all the Wikinews style guidelines and editorial policies carefully. All the claims made in the news item were those of the sourced that I referenced, not my own; I should be most grateful if you would tell me how to improve it as I would benefit from an experienced Wikinews editor instructing me as to what Wikinews considers NPOV versus the appropriate Wikipedia standard. Thank you very much for your assistance. Yours, --NicholasTurnbull 07:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you please explain more fully?[edit]

Could you please explain more fully what triggered your concern?

I found your comments on Grandfather held in Guantanamo dies of cancer abrasive. Geo Swan 21:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Your corrections stripped out the page number -- essential in this case. You correction put the wrong date on one of the documents.
The only objection you put on the article was your objection to the references -- which I believe I have fixed. Geo Swan 22:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Misou[edit]

Please see new article Senior security official: "Hardly any chance" to ban German Church of Scientology. Misou (talk · contribs) is continuing a pattern of behavior from the edit history of National Church of Scientology recognized in Spain. Cheers, Wilhelm 00:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC).

And that is what exactly? Misou 01:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA[edit]

I dunno if you do RfA thanks here, or if it's just a Wikipedia thing. If not, I reckon the trend needs broken. Many thanks for participating in my RfA, which was successful. Unfortunatly, I can't use the excuse of testing my shiny new buttons to see what they do as I have them on Wikipedia ;). So, I guess that rules out any rogue-adminish behaivour ;-). Seriously, though, cheers, and see you around on-wiki! Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

My bad[edit]

Re I still think it looks strange to quote such a generic word in the title, but fair enough. My apologies for the rename. EVula // talk // 21:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Retaining stuff[edit]

This was up for getting wiped in a day or so as abandoned. Just wanted to let someone know I was keeping it around rather than losing it. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Leaving?[edit]

My activity Level changes daily. I am not leaving Wikinews. I am sorry if that is not made clear. --User:Anonymous101 Talk 16:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

2003 detention criteria for Guantanamo Bay prison leaked[edit]

Just wanted to let you know that this is scheduled for deletion per WN:PROD as it seems to be abandoned. --SVTCobra 01:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

That's ok. I never got a response back confirming or denying the authenticity. Without that, I don't want to publish really. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 01:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)