User talk:Dan100/3

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search
Talk page archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6
Mar 5 2005
Apr 5 2005
Apr 3 2005
May 9 2005
Jun 8 2005
Jun 30 2005
Jun 28 2005
Jul 20 2005
Jul 18 2005
Apr 3 2006
Apr 4 2006
Mar 7 2007

Yahoo 360 invitation[edit]

Hi dan,

You were mentionning you have Yahoo 360 invitations. Could i please have one? You were saying you'd post it here. If you prefer to email: peter@lloydarcher.com is my mail.

Thanks Peter

Nothing new[edit]

Thats nothing new - and your certainly not the first person to notice me do this - its been discussed several times in IRC. I have always welcomed everybody regardless of whether they are vandels or not and I will continue to do so. Amgine agrees with me in doing this that we offer petty vandels a second chance to actually do something constructive. In fact Amgine has noted several instances at Wikipedia were high profile vandels have become respected members of the community. Anyways its easier for me to welcome everyone! → CGorman (Talk) 21:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Feedback request[edit]

Can you please check Talk:Atari Melbourne Project Revealed? I'm keen to find out how to proceed. Thanks. RJC531

Vandal[edit]

I thought you were never going to show up. It's 6pm on a Friday; I should've been at the pub an hour ago. :-) - Borofkin 08:12, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Rwanda[edit]

Hi, thanks for the offer. Wold you mind if I email you if I have to? I'm not absolutely convinced I'm going to have access to editing here. Borokfin is OK with that so then all time zones would be covered (I think). I would of course include all the notes and everything and you could just paste it into the Talk page. ClareWhite 09:40, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contacting Wikinewsies[edit]

What's up with erasing Wikinews:Contacting Wikinewsies and making a redirect to Wikinews:User directory? NGerda 15:41, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Because the contents of 'contacting' is now part of 'directory', instead of just a transclusion, which has usability issues. Dan100 (Talk) 16:11, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
OK, I get it. The contact information is still available :) NGerda 16:13, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Vandal[edit]

I thought you were never going to show up. It's 6pm on a Friday; I should've been at the pub an hour ago. :-) - Borofkin 08:12, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Rwanda[edit]

Hi, thanks for the offer. Wold you mind if I email you if I have to? I'm not absolutely convinced I'm going to have access to editing here. Borokfin is OK with that so then all time zones would be covered (I think). I would of course include all the notes and everything and you could just paste it into the Talk page. ClareWhite 09:40, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contacting Wikinewsies[edit]

What's up with erasing Wikinews:Contacting Wikinewsies and making a redirect to Wikinews:User directory? NGerda 15:41, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Because the contents of 'contacting' is now part of 'directory', instead of just a transclusion, which has usability issues. Dan100 (Talk) 16:11, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
OK, I get it. The contact information is still available :) NGerda 16:13, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Your comments on Wikinews[edit]

Hi!

Just read your comments about Wikinews in your blog (When you go to check the source for a two-paragraph story, and see that it's a well-written, three-page in-depth analysis of a difficult and complex situation in Iraq, you have to wonder what the hell we're doing.).

I would point out two things:

  • It's only possible to build a massive audience for independently created and reported news if you have the main stories of the day covered. That is, if we only cover exclusive topics, Wikinews can never become the first choice for people to get their news coverage. (An example of this is http://www.newstandardnews.net, a donation-funded news site with a lefty bent that has a worse Alexa ranking than even Wikinews -- because it only has exclusive content.) This, then, also makes it more difficult to get more contributors for original reporting. Every newspaper knows that, that's why they all have feeds from Reuters and AP. We are different, in that ..
  • .. we create a free content news source and archive, so we can't simply license proprietary content. This is essential in that, even where we summarize existing content, our content can be used by anyone to build upon free of charge and free of advertising. This empowers independent media producers around the globe. Our content is also eternally available as a free news archive for researchers, a function that should not be underestimated.

I think these two points are important. I strongly disagree that there is no bias in mainstream news coverage by Reuters et al., but even if you don't see that bias, I think the work Wikinews is doing is clearly beneficial. However, I believe we should make more use of public domain news sources such as http://www.voanews.com/ (which is obviously biased, but the bias can be fixed) in order to seed our general news coverage.--Eloquence 06:21, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

**** me someone reads my blog?! Dan100 (Talk) 15:08, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yes someone reads your blog, several people in fact and its a ****in pain that I can't comment there because im not a member. → CGorman (Talk) 16:02, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

lol I was wondering if anyone read it (I read yours CG!). BTW can you not post comments because you're not a Yahoo! member, or not a 360 member? PS I will write a reply to Elo soon Dan100 (Talk) 16:50, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Im a Yahoo member and can't post, so I suppose its the 360 thing. Anyways my own blog is dead - I find it more productive to write Wikinews stories than commentry on wikinews. → CGorman (Talk) 18:53, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Damn. I thought Yahoo members could post - if it's 360s only, that's quite sucky. Seems a bit late to switch to Blogger now. Hmmm, will have to think about it. (And this thing didn't tell me you'd replied!)

I've also replied to Elo on my blog. Dan100 (Talk) 08:02, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A blog which I've now moved to Blogger. Dan100 (Talk) 11:29, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

rwanda[edit]

You probably saw it but please could you put my story up (was me, just managed to login!) technological hell here, but otherwise should be more reports coming. Thanks - can't make tags work still! - ClareWhite

Bush/Iran[edit]

I'm familiar with policy -- I've read the Wikinews:Cite sources and Wikinews:Original reporting and personally believe that the article is wreckless... My comment on the talk page was informational, as I too have/had concerns about the article -- I only noted NGerda's explanation to me as to why the article was being retained and {{publish}}ed. Several of the other OP articles have no notes or explanations on their talk pages. Your statement, "...if we can't fully validate a story, it doesn't run." is evidently only partially true. Policy is developing, apparently, and the stated policies are not being followed. Perhaps objections should be more strongly stated; perhaps this article, in particular, should be moved back to developing stories. --Chiacomo 22:33, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I must have mis-read your comments, sorry!
Yes, anything without good notes shouldn't run. If you see that happening, it's probably because we've slipped up, so don't hesistate to put {{sources}} on such stories and de-list them! Dan100 (Talk) 10:27, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello

User block[edit]

Dan, you recently blocked User:AutisticPsycho with a note of "offensive username". I don't find the username very offensive, and honestly don't see how it would be taken as such. Can you please explain if I'm missing something? -- IlyaHaykinson 13:54, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It is extremely offensive! How can you not see that? Perhaps you don't know what autism is? Dan100 (Talk) 13:58, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I know very well what autism is. It simply seems to me that people don't typically stereotype those with autism as "psycho" — and that the term is no more offensive than if the username was "ObesePsycho" or "BlindPsycho". -- IlyaHaykinson 14:11, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry but now I don't understand your point. I've worked with autistic children and personally find the username very offensive. I'm sure this user will be able to think of something more mature to edit under. Dan100 (Talk) 14:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In fact I suggest you ask the parents of an autistic child if they think it's a suitable name. Dan100 (Talk) 14:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I accept your perspective on this issue. Thanks for clearing it up. -- IlyaHaykinson 14:33, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No problem :-) Dan100 (Talk) 14:57, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I would like to point out that I know the individual involved as he is a member of my forum. He does not intend this name to offend as he is autistic himself. He is using the name in reference to himself. Gareth Nelson

That may be the case, but people *do* find the name offensive, even if he doesn't mean it to be. Dan100 (Talk) 10:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You're taking this too far. Who cares what his name is? He feels he is best represented by said name, and if he has autism he's all the more qualified to be able to use the word in his name. Additionally, autistic as a description can refer to a wider range of attributes than possessing autism, these attributes include Autistic Savant, and there are some notable individuals who experience very minor (if any) attributes of autism yet possess extraordinary intellect and capability. To be frank, Dan, you're overreacting and you need to stand down from this defensive posture. "It is extremely offensive! How can you not see that?" Do you see?! Do you see?! No Dan, we don't really. Usurper 18:04, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thank you Usurper, and Dan, before you blocked this enthusiastic and capable individual, did you once consider talking to him about his name? Hopefully you've learned from this to think a little harder before you make a rash discussion like blocking an innocent user. NGerda 18:07, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

We have a strict policy - offensive usernames are not allowed. I - and several other "real life" people I've talked to - do find this offensive. Quite likely a large number of people will feel exactly the same if they check the article history. Dan100 (Talk) 07:28, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, then let their concerns be raised. At this point, you're the only one I know of that's seriously offended. NGerda 15:00, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Gone for a few days[edit]

I'll be in Korea for the OhMyNews forum until Sunday. I'll try to do some reporting about the event. I've briefly looked at NGerda's changes. I don't like the "THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN" comments, but I think automating the news workflow is desirable, and by using the date categories, you at least reduce the DPL problems somewhat. Perhaps you could settle on a compromise of trialling this for a couple of weeks and then having a discussion/vote? I think it's very difficult to judge such things beforehand (remembering my own experience with the initial stages system), so I like trying out new things once in a while, as long as we're still in Beta anyway.

I actually logged in to ask you for a favor. As I'm preparing my presentation, I notice that it's quite difficult to find some examples of excellent Wikinews articles we've written so far: substantial original reporting, research, added value, interesting topics, and so forth. This would generally help in communicating the value of Wikinews to the outside world. Would you be willing to set up Wikinews:Featured articles and Wikinews:Featured article candidates pages modeled after the Wikipedia ones? (Apologies if something like this already exists somewhere.)--Eloquence 02:32, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

in defence of the stub[edit]

I've just been thinking about this and I think there could be some sort of happy medium between stubs and developing stories. I do agree that they shouldn't be on the developing stories list when they're not really being developed but also think that the Submitted stories section is too big and evil for someone who just wants to pick up a story and add more detail. It gives me the sense that Submitted stories sit and wait for someone to pick them up and move them whereas in fact I know that they could be developed on that page. Might it be friendlier if the submitted story section of the workspace could be split into sections for easier editing of them on an individual level? Also you could encourage people there to post links when they want a story on Wikinews, which I know gets done already but could be brought more into our process and also maybe people could indicate whether they do want a story developed, perhaps by adding a second line from the story. By making this process easier, you might get more people collaboratively writing stories they are interested in. Plus I think it makes sense to extend the easier developing > submitted tags for submitted > developing - that would then allow us to revert the tag fi we don't feel a story is sufficiently developed. Worth working on a proposal? Or has it all been done before? ClareWhite 09:10, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Really the bottom line is that unless someon writes a full article, no-one else is going to! Very occasionally someone picks up a stub and runs with it, but basically it's up to editors to write something usable first.
A couple of users are just making blank articles with a few 'source' links and hoping someone will write the article for them - that's pretty cheeky! Dan100 (Talk) 09:30, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello

in defence of the stub[edit]

I've just been thinking about this and I think there could be some sort of happy medium between stubs and developing stories. I do agree that they shouldn't be on the developing stories list when they're not really being developed but also think that the Submitted stories section is too big and evil for someone who just wants to pick up a story and add more detail. It gives me the sense that Submitted stories sit and wait for someone to pick them up and move them whereas in fact I know that they could be developed on that page. Might it be friendlier if the submitted story section of the workspace could be split into sections for easier editing of them on an individual level? Also you could encourage people there to post links when they want a story on Wikinews, which I know gets done already but could be brought more into our process and also maybe people could indicate whether they do want a story developed, perhaps by adding a second line from the story. By making this process easier, you might get more people collaboratively writing stories they are interested in. Plus I think it makes sense to extend the easier developing > submitted tags for submitted > developing - that would then allow us to revert the tag fi we don't feel a story is sufficiently developed. Worth working on a proposal? Or has it all been done before? ClareWhite 09:10, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Really the bottom line is that unless someon writes a full article, no-one else is going to! Very occasionally someone picks up a stub and runs with it, but basically it's up to editors to write something usable first.
A couple of users are just making blank articles with a few 'source' links and hoping someone will write the article for them - that's pretty cheeky! Dan100 (Talk) 09:30, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Well, I do have sympathy. Sometimes you want to see a story on Wikinews but you simply don't have the time to write it, however you do hope that by alerting others to the story they will write it. I regretted putting the Zimbabwe bit up today on DS because I realised I wasn't going to have time to do it justice, but I do hope that someone picks up on it. Remember many readers of Wikinews won't have time to be editors but part of the point of WN as I see it is for people to put stories on the agenda when they think they are news stories. I think this is becoming an issue with deletion requests too so I will put something on the watercooler. ClareWhite 14:14, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah, but your Zimbabwe story is much more than a stub, and has properly formatted references (yay!). I'm going to pick it up shortly if no-one else does. Dan100 (Talk) 14:44, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeh, it's those references that suck away all my time! You probably saw I just posted it on the watercooler, pitch in! ClareWhite 14:54, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

publishing article[edit]

I'm somewhat reluctant to simply drop a new article I've created straight to the main page for a particular date -- I feel like I should allow them at least some time to {{develop}} before "publishing" them. Should I feel so reluctant, or rather, should I if the article is sourced and more than just a sentence, go ahead and put it publish it? Am I rambling? --Chiacomo (talk) 15:25, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I replied on Chiacomo's page. Dan100 (Talk) 15:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply -- and the North-Korea template is great! --Chiacomo (talk) 16:13, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

vandalism[edit]

Pease block user:DaMan if you are around. Thanks --SonicR 18:53, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

He is back again (Splixo). By the way, it would be nice if you could fix my user page. Thanks--SonicR 09:19, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User:TalkHard keeps removing my beautiful shit picture from the Main Page! Splixo 09:17, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

bulldozing[edit]

I only just saw your message about that, sorry not to respond. Sitting in a furnace here... you see it's turned into Three stories now! ClareWhite 15:13, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedia foundation announces collaboration with KDE (and other things as I clutter up your talk page)[edit]

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Template:News-en

We really need a story on this... - Amgine/talk 17:23, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

<hugs and kisses> <grin> Okay, I'm trying to get it written... It's fairly newsworthy as every operating system has been asking for exactly this thing already, and only KDE has been given a nod. (Yes, apparently there have been overtures from Windows, if I un derstand the hints at least.) - Amgine/talk 17:30, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Concise is a word, as is succinct. What is up with the site notice? - Amgine/talk 22:15, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reminder[edit]

Dan, I'll be in and out throughout the night. Will watch whenever I am near a computer. Lyellin 20:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

RSS and DPL[edit]

How exactly does the RSS work at the moment? as in how is the blogger page currently updated, manualy (if so i am in awe of your dedication) or automagically? Is it impossible or just difficult with DPL? How often is the blogger page updated? in real time or once every x hours? Thanks, im just trying to get a handle on the issues surrounding DPL on the front page before i express any opinion on the matter. ~The bellman | Smile 01:47, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

ps. i should read your talk page more often, i would never have known about the KDE deal if i hadnt come here. pps. as one of the 1000 and something RSS subscribers, just thought i'd say thanks.

Oh, and by the way...[edit]

For hours of effort creating and maintaining the RSS feed blog, and other time-consuming work behind the scenes... I, Amgine, award User:Dan100 this endurance award.

A couple of us were talking about the RSS feed, and the upshot was....

RSS[edit]

Heyho Dan100,
is there an other way (not with a blog) of makeing RSS for Wikinews? Conny 11:23, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC).

No. Dan100 (Talk) 12:55, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

a dog's siesta[edit]

Thanks for taking the time to write such a full answer. I'll let sleeping dog's lie for the moment as you requested, but the issues you raised regarding the colourblind are very important indeed i think, and im going to see if i can talk to some of the bigwigs about this for a project wide change. Amgine pointed out to me earlier today (yesterday for her now) that there is another rss feed <http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Category:Published?feed=rss> which links straight to the articles rather than goes thru your blogger thing. I realise that there are some probs with this feed atm, but when/if these are ironed out do you plan on closing your feed, and if so how to move subsribers from one to the other? ~The bellman | Smile 13:06, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Tdempsey[edit]

Hi Dan! Not sure if this is where I contact you but wanted to thank you for the introduction on my Talk page.

I am newish here so still learning the ropes and want to get more involved. I have many interests including technology, computers, business and gay issues. Just wondering where you want the most attention - I will be editing right now to learn.

I have many groups online for gay issues but don't want to overdo the gay thing here - maybe just the big picture issues like same-sex marriage.

Cheers!

Tdempsey 16:33, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

rev on commons...[edit]

I had no clue that was there (well, still don't, but going to look it up as soon as I'm done with this msg.) Thanks! it will be quite handy... - Amgine/talk 19:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hello

RSS and DPL[edit]

How exactly does the RSS work at the moment? as in how is the blogger page currently updated, manualy (if so i am in awe of your dedication) or automagically? Is it impossible or just difficult with DPL? How often is the blogger page updated? in real time or once every x hours? Thanks, im just trying to get a handle on the issues surrounding DPL on the front page before i express any opinion on the matter. ~The bellman | Smile 01:47, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

ps. i should read your talk page more often, i would never have known about the KDE deal if i hadnt come here. pps. as one of the 1000 and something RSS subscribers, just thought i'd say thanks.

I just thought I'd say thanks too! Everything that has gotten anywhere had to start somewhere. You do start it up. I especially got a kick out of your site support comment. It made me laugh, then my little 1 year old grandson laughed at me because I laughed. It's fair to say we both got a kick out of it. Sincerely, thanks. -Edbrown05 26 June 2005 21:54 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way...[edit]

For hours of effort creating and maintaining the RSS feed blog, and other time-consuming work behind the scenes... I, Amgine, award User:Dan100 this endurance award.

A couple of us were talking about the RSS feed, and the upshot was....

Really? I thought I'd given you a vandal medal too... <hrrmms> You certainly' have earned that one! Well, you know I appreciate your work - even when we disagree about specifics - and there are many others as well. <grin> even when we're at loggerheads, the amount of effort you put into the site is phenomenal and amazing! - Amgine/talk 19:23, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

RSS[edit]

Heyho Dan100,
is there an other way (not with a blog) of makeing RSS for Wikinews? Conny 11:23, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC).

No. Dan100 (Talk) 12:55, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

a dog's siesta[edit]

Thanks for taking the time to write such a full answer. I'll let sleeping dog's lie for the moment as you requested, but the issues you raised regarding the colourblind are very important indeed i think, and im going to see if i can talk to some of the bigwigs about this for a project wide change. Amgine pointed out to me earlier today (yesterday for her now) that there is another rss feed <http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Category:Published?feed=rss> which links straight to the articles rather than goes thru your blogger thing. I realise that there are some probs with this feed atm, but when/if these are ironed out do you plan on closing your feed, and if so how to move subsribers from one to the other? ~The bellman | Smile 13:06, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Tdempsey[edit]

Hi Dan! Not sure if this is where I contact you but wanted to thank you for the introduction on my Talk page.

I am newish here so still learning the ropes and want to get more involved. I have many interests including technology, computers, business and gay issues. Just wondering where you want the most attention - I will be editing right now to learn.

I have many groups online for gay issues but don't want to overdo the gay thing here - maybe just the big picture issues like same-sex marriage.

Cheers!

Tdempsey 16:33, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

rev on commons...[edit]

I had no clue that was there (well, still don't, but going to look it up as soon as I'm done with this msg.) Thanks! it will be quite handy... - Amgine/talk 19:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I forgot to explain the recent changes/upload switch[edit]

For some reason, recent changes page was entitled Upload. But I could get the Random page to have the correct title for Upload, so... I switched 'em. - Amgine/talk 26 June 2005 16:48 (UTC)

And as long as I'm talking about the site... the upgrade to 1.5 took place a bit ago; DPL survived apparently without issues. However, GWicke's RSS feed and <catnews> are completely dead. I'll see what I can learn over the next few days on the status; when I last spoke with GWicke the only place that software existed was on his laptop, so no one else was involved in its development. This of course means we don't have something to relieve you of the blog duties still. Would you want someone to help out with that? - Amgine/talk 26 June 2005 17:01 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for editing my user page -- very nice... Are you ever on #wikinews or #wikinews-en? --Chiacomo (talk) 27 June 2005 18:15 (UTC)

Article processes[edit]

Hi Dan and NGerda I'm intrigued and alarmed by all this incomprehensible talk of DPLs and production processes but I've got a bit lost. Has anything actually changed? Where does the nice looking space for uploading prepared articles belong? Is there any hope for the Suggested Articles box, at least in what was till recently called the workspace? Did publish/develop tags disappear or are they still in use? I'm obviously not spending enough time here! ClareWhite 28 June 2005 16:03 (UTC)

DPL Thankyou[edit]

Thank you very much for supporting the use of DPLs on the Main Page! I saw how quickly your nuclear reactor article was published, and that's just what Wikinews needs! The only thing I would request is that we come up with a different name for Wikinews:Story upload. What are your thoughts? -- NGerda June 28, 2005 16:48 (UTC)

I replied on NGerda's talk page Dan100 (Talk) 28 June 2005 16:53 (UTC)

The many changes...[edit]

I'm not sure if I will be able to correctly revert them, but I'll give it a shot. I wish you would have read the section regarding the dev stories above, where at least two contributors stated they were opposed to making dev DPL. (versus one who was in favour, so obviously no consensus) - Amgine/talk 28 June 2005 20:21 (UTC)

Actually there were more than three users who supported it. NGerda June 28, 2005 20:23 (UTC)
I'm hoping I got the changes you'd made to the documentation, but I'm not sure if I did. - Amgine/talk 28 June 2005 21:30 (UTC)

Mediawiki:Nogomatch[edit]

While I personally like this change, this was specifically not implemented after previous discussions to avoid orphan pages and to make links available to other editors via the Template:Developing stories. - Amgine/talk 28 June 2005 20:30 (UTC)

Actually, you were improving the 1.5 default version of that... so I'm reverting myself. - Amgine/talk 28 June 2005 20:38 (UTC)

DPL listing by day[edit]

The reason I list the DPLs by days is because a) it gets rid of Template:Develop showing up in the results, b) since articles are ordered by category addition, sorting by date organizes stories chronologically no matter what, and c) people wanted the list to still be ordered by date. -- NGerda June 29, 2005 19:19 (UTC)

Number of edits involved[edit]

You're trying to show that your systems is "better" - which if it were a monolithic, integrated system from article creation (that is, an internal "template" the software required with the creation of every article) onward it would be. The software does not actually work that way. Instead the system you wish to use requires exactly the same number of edits while in the development stages, and occasionally more.

This would not, in my opinion, prevent it from being implemented - a zero net change in effort is not a problem. However, because there is no way to implement it as a monolithic integrated system it raises significant barriers to manual users, and increases the complexity for users from other Wikimedia projects and who have never worked with a wiki previously.

There is no way you can reasonably claim this system is simpler than creating a link and typing an article. This method inclusion on Wikinews has always been, and must continue to be, fully embraced. The DPL system as it is currently implemented does not do so.

Furthermore, both NGerda and yourself have said to me, and I have logged, that users who do not follow the system will never get published. This exclusionary attitude is exemplified in this system. It is not in line with the precepts of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikinews, or even the concepts of wiki.

Now, as to the very specific question of why I am reverting the blanking of the manual list: The DPL should not be on the main page at all - it is a proposal which is contested and which does not have consensus. To avoid an edit war I and other editors are not simply removing it to, as you said in your edit summary "(let's use both systems)" for a while to see how it works. From the mood of the community I think I can say this is also the only way the system would ever be allowed - having both a manual and an automated listing. And it shows up one of the weaknesses of the system which I had previously mentioned; articles will be showing up twice.

If an author specifically chooses not to use the autmated system - and as far as I can tell no one besides yourself has done so, though you've confused two long-time contributors with the setup - hir choice of listing method should be respected. For example, I initiated the Fiji girls story. I do not wish to use the DPL system. - Amgine/talk 29 June 2005 20:31 (UTC)

Furthermore, both NGerda and yourself have said to me, and I have logged, that users who do not follow the system will never get published. This exclusionary attitude is exemplified in this system. It is not in line with the precepts of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikinews, or even the concepts of wiki. - If you can't be bothered to quote me in full and in context, I can't be bothered to reply.
For example, I initiated the Fiji girls story. I do not wish to use the DPL system. - "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here". Oh and, "don't claim ownership". Dan100 (Talk) 30 June 2005 11:05 (UTC)

Reason for reverting newarticle text change[edit]

Change implements a disputed, non-consensus process. - Amgine/talk 30 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)

I support the new system Dan100 was putting in, actually. I was rather hoping to have a go at it for a week or so, and see what we can learn from that set-up. I understand there's a dispute, but I really think that, Amgine, you're the only one strongly pushing for the status quo. -- IlyaHaykinson 30 June 2005 17:18 (UTC)
I will happily stop reverting changes once there is consensus to implement it. I believe at the moment there are at least an equal number of persons opposed as in favour, which would not resolve to consensus. I haven't looked today, but I have not seen a single person use the new system other than those in favour of it, which I think is the telling point. - Amgine/talk 30 June 2005 17:22 (UTC)
Well, actually {{develop}} and {{publish}} has been used in recent new articles by McCart42, Chiacomo, Stevertigo, Kevin Baas, Dcabrilo, Eloquence, and Sblive. I think that qualifies as support. -- IlyaHaykinson 30 June 2005 18:07 (UTC)
Uhm, since those templates were not necessarily added *by* those users, I think you may need to reasses. SteveVertigo did not even use the date template. You'll find that Chicacomo, Kevin_Baas, McCart42, Dan100, and NGerda have used the templates - and I have also used {{publish}} too. The problem is the requirement to use them in order to be listed in the developing stories template. The concept I am in favour of. - Amgine/talk 30 June 2005 18:11 (UTC)
Also, here is a classic example of using the templates and categories to remove an article from the main page. An article begun by User:Uncle G which is abandoned and is reasonably put up for deletion, but would now be completely invisible except from Dr if it were not manually on the Developing stories template. - Amgine/talk 30 June 2005 18:20 (UTC)
Of those edits listed above only Stevertigo, Eloquence, Sblive actually used the {{develop} tag the rest had it added by someone else or only used the now required and unopposed {{publish}} tag. --Cspurrier 30 June 2005 18:28 (UTC)

Well, actually, I think you guys are incorrect. All the users I mentioned had put the templates in themselves. If you look at the first revisions of the McCart42, Chiacomo, and Kevin Baas's articles you will see they show the develop. If you look at the fourth revision of the Dcabrilo article you'll see the publish tag — and it's the fourth revision without anyone else making changes since the start of the article. I believe that seven people (plus myself, plus Dan100, plus NGerda, whom I didn't mention) constitute agreement on using this feature. -- IlyaHaykinson 30 June 2005 20:46 (UTC)

Please explain "this feature"? I do not dispute using publish. I only dispute using DPL for the developing stories template. - Amgine/talk 30 June 2005 20:49 (UTC)
Sorry, It looks like I was wrong everyone on your list but Dcabrilo, used the the dev tag at some point. My other issue with the new text is " but be sure to add
Bookmark-new.svg
to your article if you want it published at once.", I think it is a very bad idea to encourage user to publish thier stories with out it spending time on the Dev page first. --Cspurrier 30 June 2005 20:54 (UTC)


Clare also uses this system.
So let's be clear, using the new system are:
  1. Me
  2. NGerda
  3. McCart42
  4. Dcabrilo
  5. Stevertigo
  6. SBlive
  7. Chiacomo
  8. Clare
  9. KevinBaas
  10. Ilya
  11. Eloquence
Against this is: Amgine, and possibly Cspurrier.
Hmmm.
And let's be clear a bit more: my newsarticletext only suggests that a user can use developing if they want, but they should be sure to use publish if they want to publish. What, exactly, is wrong with that?
I'm pretty tired of Amgine's bullying, but I do not submit to bullies. Dan100 (Talk) 30 June 2005 20:57 (UTC)

Amgine, I propose that we change our model of tracking new articles to using the Newpages list to ensure that every article has at least some state on it — either publish or develop (or something else that comes along). That shouldn't be overly difficult. I am willing to not push for Developing Stories having a DPL if I can get you to agree to this in principle — in the meanwhile, we will encourage the process with newarticletext that refers to using the tags, optionally, until such time as new article creation is more intelligent and uses technology (i.e. a custom-developed plugin or extension to mediawiki). Is that something you can be ok with? -- IlyaHaykinson 30 June 2005 21:04 (UTC)