User talk:Aselman/Archive 01
|This is an archive of past discussions from User talk:Aselman. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the|
Our key policies - if you read anything, read these!
- Wikinews:Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
- Wikinews:Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews:
- Wikinews:Introduction - overview of the site
- Wikinews:Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
- Wikinews:Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
- Wikinews:Contents - the contents page.
- Wikinews:Newsroom - The comunity portal
There are always things to do on Wikinews:
- Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
- The front page lead articles often need updating
- Developing stories need finishing and publishing
- Discussions need your input
- And of course, stories need writing!
By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 20:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Wikinews desperately needs more gutsy reporters; please give the project as much time as you can spare. Neutralizer 18:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- Great work on the protest article. There is some questions, however as to how you got your information. Please comment on the talk page: talk:"World Can't Wait" protesters rally outside the White House. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Valentine's at Vietnam War Memorial
Hey, hi and wow again! The Source your provided is a 'dead-link' and should probably be under the header of an "External link" since your likely drew little or nothing from that web site for use in the photo essay. Secondly, I find the mention of your credit at the last line of the main body of the article crossing the line of self-promotion, which is discouraged here. I think it should be removed. Best regards. -Edbrown05 04:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments Ed. Fixed both. The last line was a suggestion from another Wikinewsie and I have pulled it. I actually pulled the stats for the visitors to the site and my other basic info from the site before my report. I will leave it as source as it was just that, a source.Drew 04:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- I should have asked you to publish, thinking you were done. My concern was the earlier problem I had with the 'dead-link' under source, and when I found that working I published. -Edbrown05 05:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- One more comment on the article (and I am not trying to change it, it took long enough to publish, so that's why this is not on the article discussion page). You said you wrote this from the perspectice of a "world reporter", but I don't think that you article reflects that. In particular the sentence "Conceived as a symbol of a never ending reminder of our connection to the veterans of Vietnam, the wall holds strong memories for everyone who visits the wall." has a very American flavour. Let me explain.
- Having grown up mostly in countries that had either little or no connection to the war, and having visited the memorial a couple of years ago, I cannot say that the wall "holds strong memories" for me. I would assume the same to be true for most of the 6 billion people on this planet, but if you only count the people that actually visit the wall (as you do), then, while being an overstatement, the word "every" is probably reasonably accurate. But I still cannot square with the word "our". You say it has been "conceived as a symbol of a never ending reminder of our connection to the veterans of Vietnam", I find it difficult to find myself in that "our". More importantly however, I have a strong suspicion that the average Viet Cong veteran would take strong offense with that statement. Even if the statement is accurate in a sense that the walls purpose was really to serve as a reminder for the connection of everyone on this planet to the veterans of the war (and I have no idea if it is), this would merely examplify the arrogance of the founders that in that case were not able to see why this memorial cannot fit that purpose for the people of Vietnam.
- As I said, something to think about... And nice pictures! --vonbergm 23:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Be aware of local spelling
When an Australian-based story uses the British word "gaol" in a headline and in the story, don't change just the headline and claim the change was a misspelling. If it were in fact so, then change it in the story, as well. In this case, the word "gaol" is used consistently in the story.
Spelling consistency between headline and story is important - that's why your first story's headline "protestors" was corrected - because throughout the story the word was sometimes spelled correctly (protesters). Before doing so, I made sure the more creative spelling wasn't just regional use. Karen 00:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I came away with a pretty satisfied feeling from the photo-essay. I wonder for dial-up bandwidth users how the page might load, but I thought the number of pictures was about right. I wouldn't hesitate with a few more words in the picture captions if you felt it would be appropriate (but I am a word-monger, so let that guide you towards my feelings). Best regards. -Edbrown05 05:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Were you going to add photos to this article? ironiridis 15:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry Ironiridis I have been working for the man. Pics are up and its out of development. Thanks for watching it.-Drew 03:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. I like seeing articles come to completion, especially cool ones like yours. :) Good work on that one. ironiridis 19:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
That was a cool photo essay, neat stuff. -- Zanimum 15:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, by the way, I'd encourage you to upload future photos to Wikimedia Commons so they can be used on other projects? Thx. -- Zanimum 15:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I have been asked to load photos to Wikinews only for the time being until some things are worked out with our sister project. Alos, I cannot use the CC-BY-ND license at Commons and although I don't mind republication, I am not a fan of re-manipulation of news photos.-Drew 16:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry jason, I just can't right now. I would like to see you more calm in dealing with stress and more familiar with Wiki style and world wide sensibilities. Its tough man. I would support you in another coupld of months. -Drew 03:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Photo Essay: Cherry Blossoms Bloom in DC
That's an excellent article! You're kinda like our inhouse TIME magazine guy. I really appreciate what you've written. --Sfullenwider 20:51, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for a beautiful article :)
- I noticed there is a missing [[Category:District of Columbia]] on Wikinews. -Edbrown05 05:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- I'm thinking 'District of Columbia' would be the proper naming of the Category. -Edbrown05 05:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
In your Washington Cherry Blossoms article's talk page, you said "Moreover, I do not crop photographs as a photojournalist as I believe it is a distortion of what my lens captured."
- I don't know what paper or other news outlet you work for, but photojournalists crop all the time. I think it would be interesting to see a newspaper with nothing but 3:2 ratio photographs. Furthermore, before zoom lenses, photojournalists would regularly use wide angle lenses on their view cameras to capture as much as possible and then crop heavily. Cropping isn't distorting a picture, it is more like focusing on your subject more tightly. If you didn't want to "distort" your pictures with blurred backgrounds isolating your subject and the like, I guess you could shoot at the hyperfocal point with your smallest aperture all the time, but who would do that? Also, just by using a 3:2 ratio sensor you're already cropping what your lens "captures" because they don't exactly put out oval shaped image circles. 188.8.131.52 13:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- I should revise the comment. First, it was a criticism of photos that had been certainly post produced and I was somewhat irritated. But as for the cropping, I work for 2-3 other outlets as a PJ and each paper has asked that we crop in only a minimal fashion. There are certainly guidelines for doing so. Mostly what I object to is cropping where it cuts out information or changes the story that the picture is trying to convey. Certainly the Ann Richards on a Harley cover of Texas Monthly was a huge problem since it was a compostie photo (Richards never sat for the picture). Cropping when used in that fashion to alter the story is a problem. I come from a minimalist school. Crop certainly to focus the story. But in an environment like Wiki, I feel its key to let the lens convey as much as possible. To tell the story the way my eye first sees it. Case in point, a photo was cropped to show only a policy officer beating on a suspect. The photo was sensational and caused a lot of problems. It told a story certainly. But, what the uncropped photo showed, was that the officer was being attacked by other armed criminals at the time. He was in essence fighting for his life. Completely different story than what the PJ or his editors allowed. So this is what I meant to say certainly. Crop, but don't change the story, no matter how tempting. -Drew 16:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Regarding my RfA
Hi, curiousity seeks the cat. -Edbrown05 06:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. Just very, very busy with work these days. Not much time. I've a new screenplay in the works -Drew 21:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)