User talk:Chandlerjoeyross

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

Welcome to Wikinews! I hope you enjoy this free news source and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help.


Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the free content news source...

Finding your way around:

Need Help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

  • Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The Button sig.png button, on the tool bar above Wikinews' text editing window, also does this.
Good luck, and have fun.Legoktm - (talk) 23:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)}}

Legoktm - (talk) 23:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Contents

Note[edit]

Due to a recent change in guidelines, all articles must be reviewed by an independent user before publication. To ask for this review please tag your articles with {{review}}. I have reviewed your articles from today, this is just a note to ask you to follow this when writing article in the uture. Thanks, Anonymous101talk 16:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Professional wrestler Walter "Killer" Kowalski dies at age 81[edit]

Where did you get the info for this article? The cited sources do not back up virtually any of the info in the article itself. Cirt (talk) 23:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

If that is the case that you got info from the Wikipedia article, you did not cite the Wikipedia article as a source. I went through the article and the secondary sources listed when I did the review and literally none of the sources listed corroborated with any of the info in the article - so were those secondary sources not used at all and the Wikipedia article was the only source? Even if the Wikipedia article were cited at that time, it really is best to rely more on other secondary sources instead. Cirt (talk) 19:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Article tags[edit]

please remember, when creating articles, to add {{develop}} or {{review}} to them so they can be found in the newsroom. If no tags are present, then the article can only be noticed in recent changes. If no one notices it, then it could be come orphaned and buried in Wikinews, only to be found much later. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 17:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Please try to remember to add proper tags to articles you create/review/publish :-P DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 16:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Contributing Reporter Award[edit]

This award is presented to Wikinews reporters upon their 11th published news article.

Please note you shouldn't add yourself to the list of people with these awards until someone actually gives you it. Liked the Newman one, but keep looking at what changes get made after you've started an article to improve your wikinews-foo. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

File:R Venkataraman.jpg[edit]

Can you please add a source and a fair use rational for this image? Thanks :-} DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Heartbeat title card.jpg[edit]

This non-free image is claimed to be used under fair use but has no explanation on why it is permitted under our fair use policy. Non-free images are not permitted on Wikimedia Foundation projects without fair use rationales. Please supply a detailed rationale for each use of this image in all of the articles that it is used in, and remove this template when that has been done. Images without valid rationales are eligible for speedy deletion. --SVTCobra 22:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

If you do not address these issues the image will be deleted. --SVTCobra 11:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Self publish[edit]

Due to policy changes at Wikinews articles should now never be self-published. All articles must be labelled {{review}} and independently reviewed. This is controlled by FlaggedRevisions and adding {{publish}} will not put an article on the front page. It is more likely to get lost if tagged as such without review. --Brian McNeil / talk 08:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

"Strange" quote mark characters[edit]

Please do not prepare stories off-wiki with an editor that uses non-standard quote characters. The acceptable quote characters are " and ' which should replace any quote marks such as those a word processor inserts. The recent obituary you submitted had this problem and was put up for review with attempted links to Wikipedia using these irregular quote marks. Wikipedia does not use them either so the wikilink gave an error when you clicked on it. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

James Pain (talk) 14:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

James Pain (talk) 14:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

James Pain (talk) 17:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

James Pain (talk) 19:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Celebrity plastic surgeon Dr. Frank Ryan dies in car accident aged 50[edit]

The image you stuck on Commons for this article has been deleted.

Can you sort this out ASAP? And, please figure out what has caused this problem. --Brian McNeil / talk 00:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

'minuetes'[edit]

I've been operating under the misapprehension that a 'minuete' was either a dance, or a tower of the folly variety. ;-) --Brian McNeil / talk 18:17, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

-), Sorry. My Bad. Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 18
20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Will do[edit]

Will do, thanks :) Wackywacedictaphone 18:44, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Labour Party announces Ed Miliband as new leader[edit]

Hi. I don't wanna cause an edit conflict, so can you move this to UK Labour Party announces Ed Miliband as new leader when you get a chance? There's a few Labour Parties around - Australia's another place with one. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:57, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Close paraphrase[edit]

I'm uneasy about the Slovenian cyclist obit on a number of levels. Key among those is how close your wording it to both sources. That being said, I suspect the chosen two are both derived from the same wire report - because they have the same issue as your copy has in relation to theirs. --Brian McNeil / talk 01:17, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

categories?[edit]

I'm puzzled. It seems you're making odd modifications to a bunch of categories (odd to me, that is, hence my inquiry here). One I just noticed was removing the {{Countrycategory}} template, and thus the associated description, format, DPL, etc. from Category:Serbia and Montenegro. Generally (and including that one) these were introducing glitches into the category hierarchy, though certainly in some cases there were also pre-existing glitches to keep them company.

Why the changes? --Pi zero (talk) 17:03, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Former professional wrestler Giant González dies aged 44[edit]

It would speed up the reviewing time if you proofread/copyedited the article for a minute after finishing and complied with the style guide. While I feel generally confident about copyediting, I don't know much about wrestling, so it was a bit harder for me to go about identifying some things that needed to be fixed. fetch·comms 18:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and other than the story being stale (he died on 22 September), HuffPo isn't the most reliable source. Perhaps this would have worked out better? fetch·comms 18:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Former Prime Minister of Russia Viktor Chernomyrdin dies aged 72[edit]

Hello there! Your article Former Prime Minister of Russia Viktor Chernomyrdin dies aged 72 has become very old. You must take action to refresh it with new headlines and following the useful tips given by Brian McNeil at the article's talk page, which is also selected for the community's attention. If you don't the article may be deleted very quickly as it has become old. I hope you'll have my suggestions. Thanks,--Sainsf :) (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Dominican comedian Freddy Beras-Goico dies aged 69[edit]

Hello there. Please think about expanding your article, Dominican comedian Freddy Beras-Goico dies aged 69, a couple of sentences by adding the points I have written on the talk page. Regards, — μ 19:07, November 18 2010 (UTC)

FIFA announce Name of country to host 2018 World Cup; Name of country to host 2022 World Cup[edit]

Fancy collaborating on this? wackywace 15:00, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Yup, am watching on TV now. wackywace 15:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Absolutely no idea :-) You? wackywace 15:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Interesting... wackywace 15:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Cheers! Thanks for your invaluable help on the article—nice job finding the reaction from the countries which lost. Regards, wackywace 07:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

Schneeflocken in Deutschland - 20100102.jpg
May your family have
a joyous holiday season
and a new year blessed
with hope and happiness.

fetch·comms 22:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

File:BAD NEWS NAKED EYE.jpg[edit]

Just to let you know, as this image was GFDL'd, you should have uploaded to Commons under the free licence, rather than to upload it locally under a restrictive copyright. (You also didn't comply with the GFDL licence, as you didn't attribute the author on the image page itself). I have reuploaded the image to Commons & deleted the local file in this instance; please do so yourself in future. Regards, — μ 19:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Great, thank you. I had a feeling I have done something wrong but was not sure. Will follow it correctly next time. Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
You appear to have uploaded locally another file that should have been uploaded to commons: File:2LT Leonard Lomell.jpg. It's clearly tagged as "public domain", so it does not require attribution nor a fair use tag. Please upload such images to Commons, not locally, in future — I don't particularly like messing with the toolserver for things like this: please do it yourself in future. — μ 21:44, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Diego Grez return fire 23:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Guatemalan football executive shot dead after team meeting[edit]

Sorry about the edits! I had difficulty understanding the story, not being a footballer or from Guatemala! So I was confused. My apologies! Mattisse (talk) 22:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Decorated US soldier Leonard Lomell dies aged 91[edit]

Very nice article. Clear and concise! Mattisse (talk) 00:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Article renames[edit]

Please do not move articles after publication unless absolutely vital. Renaming published articles creates duplicate entries in Google News, on our Twitter feed etc. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 16:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unaware that they article had been published. Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 16:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
No worries! :) Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 16:30, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this![edit]

Blues musician Pinetop Perkins dies at age 97‎ - One of my favorites. I never would have known without your article. Mattisse (talk) 00:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Review notes[edit]

Please read the review notes of for this article Talk:At least fourteen dead after eating toxic fish in Madagascar, thanks. Gopher65talk 21:58, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, will look a lot closer next time :) Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 22:13, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I am soliciting your input please![edit]

I am attempting a Dispute resolution at Wikinews:Dispute resolution/Brian McNeil and Mattisse and I am soliciting your input as to the problem. I urge you to give feedback. Soliciting input is the next step in the Dispute resolution process. Please do! Regards, Mattisse (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Small favor to ask[edit]

Please do a quick copyedit on your articles before submitting them for review, which speeds up reviewing times. Most of the typos and errors in Man commits suicide by jumping from Burj Khalifa could have been corrected in ~15 seconds.

Just trying to help make reviewing faster :) fetch·comms 04:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Please? Can't you even use Firefox or another browser with spellcheck? Or please, just proofread for thirty seconds. Please. fetch·comms 19:20, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, must apologies. I admitt that was my bad.. Was in a hurry. Will take more care and effort next time. Regards Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 20:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

A question[edit]

In Bahamas become forth country to ban shark fishing, don't you mean "fourth"? I didn't want to change it and cause an edit conflict with you. Regards, Mattisse (talk) 21:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

 :) Yes I do mean fourth........ Thanks for that. Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 21:19, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Note[edit]

Wikinews now links to wikipedia using {{w|link}} rather than [[w:link|link]].--William S. Saturn (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Noted :) Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Colombian politician Luis Fernando Jaramillo Correa dies aged 76[edit]

Hi. I left a comment on the article talk, about the Spanish sources. Not sure there's a way around the problem, though I note this difficulty with non-English sources is something we've done a fair amount of brainstorming on, over time. --Pi zero (talk) 03:55, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Polish footballer Włodzimierz Smolarek dies aged 54[edit]

Published. See review comments and history of edits during review. --Pi zero (talk) 18:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Flagged Revisions[edit]

  • Please do not mark revisions of developing stories! You did so on the unpublished Azerbaijan obit and gave me a bit of a scare.
Checking/flagging revisions should be done via the EzPeerReview tool at publication, with edits following that being flagged if: spelling/grammatical, or within a 24-48 hr timeframe not pulling in sources after the article's publication date and checked/verified by someone independent of the actual contributing editor. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
24 hr timeframe, as we settled on that figure after noting we'd several different ones in different places. :-)  --Pi zero (talk) 13:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

AFCON 2013: Hosts South Africa draw 0-0 with Cape Verde Islands[edit]

Published. See detailed history of edits during review. --Pi zero (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for reviewing and other assistance[edit]

Hi. Next week is the start of the IPC Alpine Skiing World Championships and two Wikinewies will be attending to cover the para-alpine skiing ahead of the 2014 Winter Paralympics . This is part of an effort outlined at Wikinews:IPC Alpine Ski World Championships. Immediately following this event, there will be a Meetup in Barcelona where Wikinews, the Paralympics and efforts to similar sport coverage will be discussed. At the moment, there are only two active reviewers on a daily basis. Demonstrating an ability to get reviews for these types of events done quickly is important for Wikinews credibility and gaining access to these types of events. I would really appreciate it if you could sign up on the IPC World Championship page to review, promote articles published during this period, assist in translating these articles into another language or attend the meetup in Barcelona. Thanks. --LauraHale (talk) 09:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikinews Writing contest 2013 is here. :) Please sign up to participate?[edit]

We've created the Wikinews:Writing contest 2013, which will start on April 1 and end on June 1. It is modeled on the successful 2010 contest. Unlike the previous version, points are available for people who conduct reviews. (With a University of Wollongong class currently contributing articles, extra assistance is appreciated at this time.) It presents a great incentive for you to renew your reviewing chops, contribute some original reporting not being done by the main stream media, and write some synthesis articles on topics that could use more attention. People should be around to review to prevent a backlog if you just want to write, and several reviewers have access to scoop to make it easier to review any original reporting you do. If you are interested in signing up, please do so on Wikinews:Writing contest 2013/entrants. There is at least one prize on offer for the winner along with the opportunity to earn some barn stars as a way of thanking you for your participation. :D --LauraHale (talk) 10:35, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer?[edit]

You currently have the Reviewer bit.....you still around these parts?? --Bddpaux (talk) 19:16, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

There's a fast-track process for restoring privs removed merely for inactivity. --Pi zero (talk) 16:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Busy elsewhere? We understand, but this is a notice of privilege expiry!

Note! Your privileges on English Wikinews have been reduced.

Under the Privilege expiry policy (enacted October 13, 2012) the rights held by your user account have been reduced due to inactivity, or lack of privilege use. You can view your user rights log here.
Point 4 of the Privilege expiry policy provides for fast-tracking reacquisition of privileges. We all understand that real-life commitments can severely curtail the level of commitment you can give to Wikinews; the privilege reduction is in no way intended as a reflection on your past work, or to imply you are unwelcome. The aim in curtailing privileges is to address security risks, and concern that a long period of inactivity means you may not be up-to-date with current policy and practices.

Wrong body cremated at funeral of British MEP Philip Bradbourn[edit]

Hi. I struggled with this; after concluding the difficulty was beyond what I could do as an independent reviewer, I really tried to explain and offer guidance; see my review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 05:19, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Whoa there![edit]

Under any other circumstances, I'd be delighted to see two, nearly three, articles getting pushed towards review by one person. However, it looks like we're going to be getting hit by the University of Southern Indiana at the same time as the University of Wollongong.

Can you do a little bit to help out with that? You've been around long-enough you're dramatically more-familiar with layout and the style guide than they are. Besides, they're typical students — they don't read the documentation until the second or third time they're pointed at it. Catching details like failing to use {{w}} links, lack of categories, mangled source templates, and anything else of that nature (with, importantly, edit summaries as to changes being made) is going to be a big help.

Plus, if you spot any absolute train-wreck submissions that lack sources altogether, or other 100% certain it'll never pass review issues, don't be afraid to put the article back to {{develop|See X, Y, Z in policy and style guide}}. As long as the main contributor also gets slightly-longer talk page feedback, plus a few of the aforementioned minor fixes, we can probably keep them busy looking for their own mistakes and fixing them. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:50, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I'll more than happily have a read through submitted articles and do the best I can to spot blatant errors. Hopefully this will speed up the system so it is easier for reviewers like yourself to get them published. Any errors I make please do point out and I'll try to get on board as fast as possible.
Thanks Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 11:58, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Great! This is going to be a challenge, I'm hoping we can play the two universities off against each-other once they've got a few articles published — have them doing the same where there will be no conflict of interest, as might exist were they working on/critiquing their classmates work. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Nominated for review[edit]

I'm assuming you're happy to accept the nomination to be speedily re-granted the reviewer bit? If so, can you pop over and indicate such on the comments section of the nomination? --Brian McNeil / talk 15:04, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

If you accept the nom with a note at FRRFP, I'd be happy to provide the second support for fast-track re-granting. --Pi zero (talk) 15:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I will gladly accept the nomination. Please note that despite having privileges before I failed to review an article. Do we have a reviews guide I could look over before I review? I shall make a note accepting the nomination. Thank you and glad to be back as part of this great project. Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 17:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Fwiw, there's WN:Tips on reviewing articles, which I created back when in an attempt to address the substantial absence of documentation on how to review. I suppose WN:PILLARS and WN:Newsworthiness are both more recent, and Tips might not have been updated to refer to them yet.
If you find yourself reviewing a student article, you'll want to be quite careful of things like passages copied and scuffed up, lack of a specific, fresh focus, failure to provide a succinct lede, and similar failures on basic elements of writing; the students are here to learn, after all. --Pi zero (talk) 21:54, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Definitely a case of "please give as-much feedback as-possible" with student contributions. The two profs who, currently, throw students at us do so because we're hard when it comes to review — moreso than they're likely to see in tutorials and such. Subs- and Copy-editors were amongst the first to go when the mainstream press started to feel the pinch. It's because we're old-fashioned and still do that, that we're considered a valuable resource for teaching.
If you've not heard of it, one of the best ways to get criticism taken onboard is called the — ahem — "shit sandwich". Say something complimentary, give your criticism, then something positive encouragement-wise. Don't be afraid to point them at the style guide, repeatedly. As typical students, they don't tend to read the instructions until nagged to do so. ;)
The above is working on the assumption we'll get another reviewer/admin to pop along, hopefully cast a third vote, and speedily close & promote. Your recent articles have been getting to need less, and less, touching pre-publication. Much of it what I've done has been a 'matter of personal taste', so you're definitely back into the right mindset to review. Far, far, too-many recent priv changes on-project have been to take away. It'll be good to see someone gain a bit, a well-earned bit I might add.
Are you considering looking at accreditation too? It can, as you'd see from my article today, "take you places". ;) --Brian McNeil / talk 00:37, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Actually, as the fast-track clause ended up written, I believe, after two days if we've got two reviewers in support and no opposition (and none expected), promote. It doesn't make things instantaneous, but it does hold them down to 48 hours without creating an opportunity for gratuitous procedural quibbling later. --Pi zero (talk) 01:24, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
With great discomfort on my part for the situation I've put you in, I plan to withdraw my support on your reviewer nom. I feel like we were pushing you to move too fast, and I don't want it to make you look bad. I'd really like this to somehow come out with the fasttrack-restoration option still open to you for some time in the future, though I'm unsure quite how to finesse that. --Pi zero (talk) 00:42, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • A withdrawal of acceptance would work for that; an issue identified as needing worked on is far less of a problem than one denied. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:43, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Sierra Leone's Vice President seeking political asylum in United States[edit]

Argh. Can't access WSJ source due to paywall. (I'd recommend avoiding WSJ and NYT nowadays, for this very reason.) --Pi zero (talk) 17:30, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Ah.. I was aware that the NYT was a pay for view service but not the WSJ.. Will avoid in future. Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 17:37, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm concerned that there were (in a few cases, are) a bunch of passages that were copied from source (and scuffed up a bit). I decided to try to fix them, at least well enough for publication, and then decide whether I'm still safe to review. Finding and fixing such problems is, after all, one of the things you would be responsible for if you reviewed an article — particularly a student article, as they often don't understand what they're supposed to not do. My advice? If you don't feel you're up to it yet, hold off on reviewing. --Pi zero (talk) 19:38, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
To be honest with you, this has been a concern of mine and the main reason why I have never chose to seek reviewer status. The Sierra Leone article wasn't a particularly great article of mine and wrongly, was hastily written. I am happy for you to make the call on whether you feel it would be suitable for me to take the reviewer status. I am more than happy to work on improving my article writing before taking the step of reviewing. Let me know your thoughts on this. Thanks as always. Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 19:46, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Well, the review of that article kind of went down in flames; I agree the article was weak, but I contributed further to the problem by attempting to "fix" when I should have not-ready'd. It seems to me the chances of a good outcome for the article would have been better if I'd exercised better judgement, which perhaps says something interesting about the role of a reviewer. --Pi zero (talk) 00:40, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • A perpetual learning exercise, methinks. As with any skill, you only improve with practice and pushing outside your comfort zone.
And, the most-important skill to develop is the ability to take criticism where it may not be well-framed.
RE: Paywalled news. There are ways round this sometimes; a few places will let you have the full article text if you've come to their site from Google News, or give you an option to 'subscribe' and get a handful of free articles per week or month. Even then, I wouldn't give them the linkage from Wikinews. The penalty for paywalling can, and should, be a drop in their Google ranking as well as us declining to point people at them who might go on to pay for their version of the story. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:41, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:UEFA Euro 2016[edit]

Reminder: we don't want to create a topic cat (under ordinary circumstances) until we already have three published articles about it. --Pi zero (talk) 00:06, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

No problem, wasn't aware of that rule. In that case, are we able to have a Bath, England category? I believe there are at least 7 articles that warrant the use of it? Thanks Chandlerjoeyross (talk) 08:04, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
We could do that. There are lots of categories we could have but don't; the practical limitation on creating them is that when we create one, we should populate it immediately, and that's a lot of work. It used to be, there was little to no motive to get around to it, because the more categories we created, the easier it would be to miss some categories when creating a new article, and we'd probably forget to link the keywords locally anyway. The {{w}} template changed that (I love how such a simple device is so useful). {{w}} remembers to link locally so we don't have to, and lets out a squawk when a keyword wikilinked in an article has a local target. So that once that local target is created, sooner or later we'll look at each article that links locally to it, and consider specifically whether that article should be put into that category. Ever since the creation of {{w}}, we've escaped from forever forgetting to link things locally, and we've been slowly creating-and-populating missing categories. After several years of that, new articles have, statistically, a higher proportion of local links than they used to. --Pi zero (talk) 12:33, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

UEFA Euro 2016 qualification match abandoned after brawl in Montenegro‎[edit]

Published.

You need to work on your distance-from-source. I found long runs in there identical to source, and there's just no reason that should be happening. "Long" in this case means I think typically six or eight consecutive words; remember, the rule of thumb is there shouldn't be four consecutive words identical to source. The changes I make to fix such things (when I try) are, of course, less than optimal, because I'm limited by trying to maintain my independence for review. Best would be not just to say the same thing in a radically different way, but to redistribute the information completely. In really well-homogenized synthesis, a given synthesis sentence may have bits of information taken from distant parts of the sources, perhaps from different sources; and information from a given source sentence may end up in relatively distant parts of the synthesis. (I've long wanted to write an essay that could somehow demonstrate this sort of homogenized synthesis, giving writers a taste of what I've seen by reviewing such quality synthesis; but presenting it effectively is a challenge. I started such an essay several years ago under the imho rather catchy title "How to use sources without plagiary", but the technical problems dragged it down and I ended up working on my dialog tools instead, which may or may not eventually help with that technical problem.) --Pi zero (talk) 20:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)