User talk:acagastya

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

acagastya/talk/Archive

LinkedIn[edit]

Are we sure I can’t use LinkedIn as a source, just because you can’t access it without an account? I’m severely limited in my Sirr article to what can be gathered from a profile which was last updated a decade ago. JJLiu112 (talk) 18:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is not why we can't use it. LinkedIn hides things behind paywall, and that is what is discouraged and well, we need to find other ways to investigate.
•–• 18:03, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is true, however: Once a reporter is accredited, when they document (Talk page or via Scoop or whatever) that they saw/heard/read something, that is the verification. So, even something that is paywall'd, does NOT automatically disqualify it as a decent source. Now, historically, we want our readers to be able to visit/use/go to that source, sure.....but paywall doesn't NOT automatically make it non-usable. Just for the record. Of course, we require 2 sources.....so, if EVERYTHING in the article is just what the reporter says they saw/heard/read, that doesn't quite cut the mustard. It is a critical distinction.--Bddpaux (talk) 17:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could I have another admin's word on this? --JJLiu112 (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It has nothing to do with admins. Please do not confuse between admins and reviewers. But no, whatever they hear is not verification, it is evidence. And that needs to be verified by the reviewer. And if a reviewer cannot verify the notes, records or recordings about an alleged incident, that is not considered okay. I had given the example before and i say it again, if i claim to have seen a message sent by Leo Messi and I write an OR about it; if I cannot back my claims, in pizero's own words, "there is no reason to consider those trustworthy." Our trust in ARs is for their notes, not for the facts they found. After all, they are looking for facts, not Joseph Smith's golden tablets.
117.198.177.144 (talk) 17:34, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure who wrote that, but as is often the case, things are merely being re-worded here for the sake of talk. Yes: things must be verified. You bet. Yep. Sure thing. I (as an accredited reporter here) watched live stream/live feeds of things, etc. I wrote down word-for-word what was happening or being said. My notes were placed on the talk page. Those notes were approved by the late Pi Zero (or whomever) as source material. Why? Because I have been vetted as a trustworthy person. That is how I became an accredited reporter. My notes, taken in real-time, serve to back my claims, because the community here has stamped me as 'approved'. In the spirit, we shouldn't get too wrapped up with paywalled sources, because all of that can be problematic. My notes ARE the evidence. Reading the notes is THE ACT of verifying the notes. This is also why we need 2 sources. If I saw Joe drop his spoon on the floor, and photographed it and made notes about it, if there is no other 'source material' to back up the basics of what I'm writing, then it probably wasn't/isn't newsworthy.--Bddpaux (talk) 19:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You being vetted as trustworthy does not absolve you from requiring to provide evidence. When reviewing your notes, I am trusting the source you used and your memory. Writing about something from a paywalled source and publishing it requires to put my faith in something I cannot myself see, let alone verify. And that is unacceptable. Gaining access to something which the reviewer is barred, and people generally are barred, is inadmissible. The reporter is trying to report without bias in an ideal case, factual; however, the info they provide is still dependent on the source they see. And paywall is a strict no. You want to go ahead and consider it by putting trust in it; go ahead. But I won't consider it verified should the information not be accessible to me. And that is precisely why we avoid the situation of ARs using "Oh believe me, I saw it" situation when they report something that cannot be verified from sources.
117.198.177.144 (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As I've tried to make clear, I'm not a big fan of paywalled sources, here or anywhere for that matter. But let's make it simple:before today, have we had any policies that specifically address the topic in terms of guidance for sources?--Bddpaux (talk) 20:24, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunate, considering that seems to be the most complete source of his work history. --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:12, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm here, I'd like to give you a heads-up, there's another OR coming pretty soon (interview on Thursday, probably will start writing it later that day), and I don't want there to be too much of a backlog, so if you could put the Sirr article further up your priority queue that'd be great. --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remind me[edit]

.....it's fuzzy: What is the proper way to Wikilink stuff in an article? The syntax, I mean.--Bddpaux (talk) 19:27, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should be using {{w}} for wikilinking. {{wikt}} if you want to link to wiktionary. {{w|Foo}} will create a wikilink to Wikipedia page foo, if [[Foo]] does not exist. If it does, it will link to local page. {{w|Foo|Bar}} will create a link to foo, but the display text will be Bar. {{w|Foo|anchor=SomeSection}} will like to the subsection "SomeSection" of the page foo.
•–• 04:00, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I get it now. Thanks. And: that new 'Revision Slider' thing is cool! I don't know who made it, but I like it!--Bddpaux (talk) 16:07, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have never figured out its use, and quite frankly, it just slows up the page so I don't use that.
•–• 16:08, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When you get a moment..........[edit]

Could you ask Gryllida to check her Talk page....I requested a 'Crat take action and it appears we currently only have one.--Bddpaux (talk) 22:39, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

She's been around here recently, but seemingly no action taken re: the RfP stuff. I contacted at least 4 Stewards at Meta, and only 1 replied. They wouldn't take action because we have a 'crat. But: well.........whatevs.......I guess we just wait......for who knows how long?--Bddpaux (talk) 15:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
She said she will look soon. However, if you do want to message her in real time, consider joining IRC. Use irc.libera.chat as server, and use a username bddpaux and then type "/j #wn-reporters". Depending on the time, you will find LivelyRatification, gry, mikemoral and me there. Mike is on #wikinews and #wikinews-en too.
•–• 15:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
CC @Bddpaux:.
•–• 15:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please review my article[edit]

Please review Floods in central China kill 25 when you can. Pizza0614 (talk) 00:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for changing the categories for my user cat! —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 01:09, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the cats was easy. Wikifying and fixing the sources was the annoying part. In case if you use pywikibot, the command is: `python3 pwb.py category move -from:"Mikemoral (Wikinewsie)" -to:"Chaetodipus (Wikinewsie)" -pt:0`. Make sure you use special:BotPasswords and enable editing protected pages. They need to be manually sighted.
•–• 04:22, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK.......[edit]

Go here: Wikinews:Credential verification Why is my email address wrong, but yours isn't?--Bddpaux (talk) 19:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bddpaux: it was manually changed.
103.48.105.64 (talk) 01:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IRC[edit]

Could you get on to complete accreditation? --JJLiu112 (talk) 06:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you.........[edit]

.....still reviewing that COVID article? I might be able to finish it, but I'd need to hear from you in the next 20 minutes, or so. Very busy with work right now.--Bddpaux (talk) 15:09, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am having trouble finding some things, maybe because of rapid fact changes? Maybe if you can have a look, that would be better -- but the numbers seem ot be off.
•–• 15:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK....I will; always a pet peeve of mine when source organizations don't actually create NEW articles......they just endlessly tweak a standing article.--Bddpaux (talk) 15:15, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly: sources weren't too bad. I massage'd it a bit more than I care to, but it was a good submission.--Bddpaux (talk) 15:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't bad, but they had fluctuating numbers.
•–• 15:28, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat[edit]

Gry did respond, indicating she'd voted (I couldn't see where, though).....but was a wee bit vague on when she might take action on the action for 'Crats. Any ideas on your end?--Bddpaux (talk) 15:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To make sure I understand..........[edit]

Once an article is reviewed/published, the article is to be Protected. Auto-confirmed users can edit/add/take away (those changes must be sighted), but only Admins. can actually MOVE articles, right?--Bddpaux (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bddpaux: yes, that is correct.
103.48.104.72 (talk) 01:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse filter?[edit]

Is that a bot? If so, how does it work?--Bddpaux (talk) 19:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bddpaux: it is an extension. If an edit matches a specified patter, those edits can be classified and further automated actions can be taken. More about it is here.
From a clean-up perspective, can you teach me how to do blocks? I should know how to do those.--Bddpaux (talk) 16:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bddpaux: Do you mean blocking accounts whose edits were caught in the filter? Or blocking accounts in general?
•–• 17:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protect??[edit]

Please make sure I did protection correctly on that Australia article I just published.--Bddpaux (talk) 14:49, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let's try this again...........[edit]

What is the proper syntax for wikilinking (and why?) Why is the 'bad' way the bad way? Pandemic in that article took the reader straight to the Wikipedia article for the word 'pandemic'.--Bddpaux (talk) 01:48, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bddpaux: {{w}}. or you can scroll up, it was mentioned there.
103.48.106.234 (talk) 01:58, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK. So the way pandemic was wikilink'd took the reader straight to Wikipedia. Is that good or bad? Are we (by using any links) hoping to ONLY link them to Cat pages here at WN? I'm sort of trying to figure out what the 'crime' is here, so-to-speak.--Bddpaux (talk) 20:00, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I feel linking to pandemic was redundant. Not like they don't know what pandemic is -- {{wikt}} would suit betteer for that purpose if we really want audience to know what pandemic means.
•–• 03:16, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Catred[edit]

Re:this edit, I’ve seen how other wikis do this and it does not involve the ordinary REDIRECT magic word. They use a table but that is easily replaced by existing templates we already use, e.g. {{ombox}}. Very little of what I added matches other wikis word got word but there are obvious limits. Licensing differences don’t mean we cannot use wiki code. [24Cr][talk] 15:04, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing difference also means we cannot use wiki code as it is as under the license -- but I don't understand why we need to make it look like other wikis? We should *NOT* have category -> category redirects, after all. So it makes it a very rare thing to begin with.
•–• 15:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The licensing differences do not apply to wiki code unless there is wholesale copying. For example, as far as I know, there is only one way of putting in a condition like {{#ifeq:0|0||. It would be impossible to do that in my own words because those are the words needed for it to work. I agree we should not copy things wholesale but this is a snippet for an unavoidable thing. I’m not trying to make it look like other wikis except to improve wherever possible. As for whether to have category redirects, I have seen several categories which we don’t need because there are more relevant categories e.g. Category:Missing citations has not been used in a long time because we use the Sources template. I’ve redirected it to Category:Sources. Then there is Category:OTRS which needed to be moved to Category:VRT but we shouldn’t delete the old category because it might still be linked to from elsewhere. Finally I’ve moved Category:Interview to Category:Interviews which wouldn’t work well if I’d deleted the original category. So I’d say we need a redirect template to clarify to other users. To be fair, you must have had a reason to create the template in 2018. [24Cr][talk] 17:13, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, of course, those things are too simple to be copyrighted, I assumed we both had that in the back of our mind. When I created it, pi said we won't really require it, because cat->cat redirect is highly discouraged. But he didn't delete it, and it is sitting there, without any good use. Don't know what to do, but yes, your edits seem all right! Cheers!
•–• 17:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Team categories[edit]

Not so much encyclopedic as trying to bear in mind the unresolved discussion at Category talk:Cristiano Ronaldo. [24Cr][talk] 09:45, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IRC[edit]

I've tried to reach out multiple times on IRC, so I'll do so here as well. Could we arrange a time to do the review process, or, if necessary, expedite the process to another reviewer? --JJLiu112 (talk) 22:13, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I ask again, could we find a time? --JJLiu112 (talk) 19:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And once again, could we find a time? @Acagastya: --JJLiu112 (talk) 17:11, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And yet again. --JJLiu112 (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Switching accounts[edit]

Hello, it's ICameHereForNews. I am now using this account because I have decided that I would like to use this account as my global account. Could you please move my old userpage to my new userpage? CheatCodes4ever (talk) 21:23, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Also, please do the same thing with my talk page. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 21:25, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CheatCodes4ever: I think you should put {{doppelganger|CheatCodes4ever}} on user:ICameHereForNews and user talk:ICameHereForNews. Moving seems to be something I am not sure about; because the account wasn't renamed.
103.48.105.78 (talk) 07:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I would like it moved is because I would like to have the history and content of my userpage. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 20:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Never mind, I'm going to use a global userpage now. Could you please delete my userpage? CheatCodes4ever (talk) 00:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:61417197c2766.image.jpg copyright violation[edit]

@Henrymyman: and @LivelyRatification: as well; This file, in use on Inter-Korean communication lines restored, is a copyright violation. As has been repeatedly established in various deletion discussions on Commons (example), images from the Korean Central News Agency are not available under a license compatible with Commons requirements. I recommend immediate removal of this file from this news story. Best regards, --Hammersoft (talk) 12:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hammersoft: It'll be replaced then. Henrymyman (talk) 12:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Per archival policy, we can't replace the photo post-24-hour mark. We need commons admin to delete it (@Cromium:) and then we can mark that file as {{missing image}}. •–• 13:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Recent attacks in Afghanistan[edit]

Hello Acagastya, how are you doing?

Please see d:Q108905779 - as on some other Wikinews versions, both the recent attacks may be "wrapped" into one single article (to keep the topic "fresh" at the moment it is published, in line with your policy here). De Wikischim (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@De Wikischim: hi. If someone could translate and write it here (English sources would be greatly appreciated; as we don't have fr/nl speaking reviewers), maybe one of us could review. I can't promise anything, since I am pre-occupied for my exams. 103.48.104.51 (talk) 04:45, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

@Acagastya:, I just started working on Wikinews and I do not have enough experience. Thank you for help. Miladtayan (talk) 08:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Award of Journalistic Magnificence[edit]

The Award of Journalistic Magnificence is given to writers who complete a substantive body of work or series of articles, primarily focused on matters of national and/or political significance for any given nation. This extremely overdue award is being given for two particular groups of articles: match reports for football (soccer) and interviews with scientists, which you’ve been writing for a number of years. The award is also to recognise your reviewing work and admin tasks. Thank you very much for your efforts and I hope you will continue to do so well into the future. [24Cr][talk] 15:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Cromium:.
•–• 11:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you enjoy blocking accounts?[edit]

Does blocking accounts make you horny? Oh baby! Does it make you feel good at night? Is it better than porn for you? You know you want to rub oil on the people who you block. You filthy pervert. The only reason you were made an admin is because you can't give a decent bedroom performance. I recommend that you spend some time at the gym and eat something healthy (maybe an apple) instead of Kentucky Fried Chicken.--10s and Thunders (talk) 02:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@10s and Thunders: jokes on you, I am vegan.
103.48.104.14 (talk) 03:27, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions Wanted!![edit]

In WHO classifies new South African variant of COVID-19 'Omicron' as 'Variant of Concern' a new section can be added which would include recent updates about the news. For e.g. ==Recent Developments==
Is it okay to add it? 2006nishan178713 (talk) 16:15, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@2006nishan178713: news articles don't do "recent developments" -- that is encyclopædic. News articles are snapshot in time and therefore should be focused around that. If you feel there was a recent development about the new variant -- there should be a separate article discussing just that. See these articles for example Pakistan's National Assembly passes bill to merge Federally Administered Tribal Areas with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Provincial Assembly votes to merge with Pakistani Federally Administered Tribal Areas, Pakistani President signs bill to merge Federally Administered Tribal Areas with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
•–• 05:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

I didn't understand this. Can you please explain?? https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Russian_President_Putin_visits_India,_signs_major_trade_and_arms_deal&diff=4652547&oldid=4652546&diffmode=source2006nishan178713 (talk) 05:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understood 2006nishan178713 (talk) 06:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@2006nishan178713: which dollar is it -- better to specify.
•–• 11:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request deletion[edit]

Please delete -

@2006nishan178713: consider tagging for {{speedy}}.
•–• 11:20, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete[edit]

This article is to be deleted today Killamarsh, UK quadruple murder suspect also charged with rape 2006nishan178713 (talk) 05:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

'Chess engine' article[edit]

This article has been floating, unpublished for quite some time. Do you plan to take some action on it soon? Perhaps move it into a Sandbox maybe?--Bddpaux (talk) 16:44, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My status[edit]

Hi ... long time ... sorry. Unfortunately I cannot commit enough time nor be reliable enough to be a bureaucrat. I will try to check in often enough so that I can remain an emergency sysop. I hope all is well with you. Cheers, --SVTCobra 03:11, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinewsie[edit]

https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/News/Cloud_VPS_2021_Purge#wikinewsie

You know better than me on whether that's still in use. Leaderboard (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A request[edit]

Could you please delete my talk page? I would like to use my old talk page instead, but then move it. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 22:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which one? You have quite a history. --SVTCobra 02:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The one I linked to. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 07:04, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I should clarify as I know what page you want deleted, but what is the talk page you want to move to that space? Also, this is a highly unusual procedure. SVTCobra 12:09, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SVTCobra: Sorry for the late reply, but I would like User talk:ICameHereForNews renamed to User talk:CheatCodes4ever. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 04:49, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse filter[edit]

Hi, I think Special:AbuseLog/15502 is a false positive for the cs-spam rule. Cheers, --SVTCobra 17:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It happened again. Special:AbuseLog/15503. --SVTCobra 13:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You may wish to consider excluding talk /ns:1 from the filter. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

special:abusefilter/38[edit]

Hi. I have removed all the complex string matches in the second half of the filter, and that didn't trigger the false positives when retested, though did let through one of two positives. Probably better to restart building those sort of straight string matches anew as they are always a little hit and miss. Also noting that that sort of spamming for /38 has stopped for a while now. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:16, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How we will see unregistered users[edit]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Unused files[edit]

Hello. Doing some background admin stuff and saw these files you uploaded a few years ago. They are not in use anywhere and seem to all be marked as fair use although they also have free licenses from yourself. Can I ask what you intend to do with them?

Cheers. [24Cr][talk] 18:56, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be moved to commons, @Cromium:. Just that I was going to use either pywikibot, or the APIs, but that is stalled.
•–• 09:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. No worries. [24Cr][talk] 09:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Test page[edit]

Where can I put the Test page or sandbox?--47.234.198.142 (talk) 23:20, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have the Wikinews:Sandbox if you want to test something. [24Cr][talk] 00:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary change to article length[edit]

Hello. As a reviewer, this note is just to let you know we are implementing a trial from February 1 to April 30 to encourage more articles to be published per the outcome of a current proposal. The minimum requirements for article length will be one paragraph of at least a hundred words. At the end of the trial the requirements will return to normal (3 paragraphs etc) and there will be an evaluation discussion about the trial. Happy reviewing! [24Cr][talk] 23:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse filter[edit]

Hi. Any ideas for how we can improve the spam filters to stop this wave of phone number spam? Cheers, --SVTCobra 16:07, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SVTCobra: I have added a rather loose rule in #37, which I hope should work? If it does not, ping me here and I will check?
•–• 16:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving[edit]

Uff. You have just gone and done what Cromimum and I were avoiding. See User talk:Cromium#Archiving. --SVTCobra 06:57, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is 10 or a week, as pi used to put it. But if we are sticking to 12, let's put out two quickly, then!
•–• 07:32, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We were experimenting with trying to fill the whitespace on the front page without a hard and fast number. Cheers, SVTCobra 14:38, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That depends on the size of the lede. It grows and shrinks -- so that is going to be a rather difficult task for rather trivial problem -- white-spaces will depend on screen-resolution, browser CSS and what not. Is there something more to it, or are we just trying to minimise the white-space?
•–• 10:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It was mainly to eliminate whitespace for aesthetics and evolve Pi zero's philosophy of keeping the list longer than the policy strictly proscribes. Cromimum was viewing on a phone and I on a computer, and things lined up. But I can see that things do change a bit when I use the zoom feature on my browser. SVTCobra 16:04, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The white space is going to be enoromous on phone, (it is not visible if you use m.wikinews as compared to desktop site), if you change skins, or have custom CSS (I have zoomed in, and large fonts for better reading), that will be affected too. Ten + few should be okay, but more than 15, that starts getting too long, imo. •–• 16:43, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested edit[edit]

Please edit User:Acagastya/popup.js to remove the redlink "Category:X1" example. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:41, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should be done now.
•–• 18:14, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: accreditation[edit]

Thinking of going out—wondering whether I can be forwarded a final copy of my WN press pass. JJLiu112 (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I got a new phone, and now no longer have access to Authenticator for WN login, which means I cannot review OR articles (cc @LivelyRatification:) or make any e-mails. Please can we coordinate a time for troubleshooting. JJLiu112 (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JJLiu112: Feel free to send me any alternative email if you have one to forward on the correspondence to. LivelyRatification (talk) 05:56, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please forward to jjliu112@yahoo.com. JJLiu112 (talk) 06:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LivelyRatification: JJLiu112 (talk) 06:17, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JJLiu112: Hi, sorry I didn't get to this, was busy all day yesterday. Given the election has happened already, I think the article would be stale, but I've forwarded it on. LivelyRatification (talk) 19:58, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JJLiu112: I am hoping your phone number hasn't changed since (I don't remember our discussion of the blood group, so sending one with and without one -- you can fill up at your own leisure if you like) -- please check your email which I will send shortly.
•–• 06:19, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JJLiu112: please PING me on IRC (acagastya@libera.chat) in about 12 hours from now? (Regarding the email problem.) That should be around 1:30 PM in US/Central?
•–• 06:24, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've school tomorrow. Does 22:00 work (08:30 New Delhi time)? JJLiu112 (talk) 06:56, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
22:30 or 23:00 would still be better, yes. TC link. •–• 07:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have downloaded the images. Thank you very much. JJLiu112 (talk) 06:57, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]