User talk:Darkfrog24

Welcome to Wikinews

Getting started as a contributor How to write an article Pick something current? Use two independent sources? Read your sources before writing the story in your own words?. Do choose a unique title? before you start. Follow Wikinews' structure? for articles, answering as many of who what when where why and how? as you can; summarised in a short, two- or three-sentence opening paragraph. Once complete, your article must be three or more paragraphs. If you need help, you can add {{helpme}} to your talkpage, along with a question, or alternatively, just ask? Use this tab to enter your title and get a basic article template. [RECOMMENDED. Starts your article through the semi-automated {{develop}}—>{{review}}—>{{publish}} collaboration process.]

Welcome! Thank you for joining Wikinews; we'd love for you to stick around and get more involved. To help you get started we have an essay that will guide you through the process of writing your first full article. There are many other things you can do on the project, but its lifeblood is new, current, stories written neutrally. As you get more involved, you will need to look into key project policies and other discussions you can participate in; so, keep this message on this page and refer to the other links in it when you want to learn more, or have any problems. Wikipedia's puzzle-globe logo, © Wikimedia Foundation   Used to contributing to Wikipedia? See here.

All Wikimedia projects have rules. Here are ours. Listed here are the official policies of the project, you may be referred to some of them if your early attempts at writing articles don't follow them. Don't let this discourage you, we all had to start somewhere. The rules and guides laid out here are intended to keep content to high standards and meet certain rules the Wikimedia Foundation applies to all projects. It may seem like a lot to read, but you do not have to go through it all in one sitting, or know them all before you can start contributing. Remember, you should enjoy contributing to the project. If you're really stuck come chat with the regulars. There's usually someone in chat who will be happy to help, but they may not respond instantly.

The core policies Neutral point of view Cite sources Writing an article Content guide Style guide Reviewing articles

Places to go, people to meet Wiki projects work because a sense of community forms around the project. Although writing news is far more individualistic than contributing to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, people often need minor help with things like spelling and copyediting. If a story isn't too old you might be able to expand it, or if it is disputed you may be able to find some more sources and rescue it before it is listed for deletion. There are always discussions going on about how the site could be improved, and your input is of value. Check the links here to see where you can give input to the running of the Wikinews project.

Find help and get involved The Water Cooler The Latest News The Newsroom Articles for deletion Audio Wikinews Recent Changes

Write your first article for Wikinews! Use the following box to help you create your first article. Simply type in a title to your story and press "Create page". Then start typing text to your story into the new box that will come up. When you're done, press "save page". That's all there is to it! It is recommended you read the article guide before starting. Also make sure to check the list of recently created articles to see if your story hasn't already been reported upon.

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Archives 1

Requesting some c/e help

Greetings @ Darkfrog24

If you are open to c/e requests, I am looking for help in copy edit help for news article Kerala: Cleric disappointed over school award organisers inviting girl student on the stage.

On en wp I work on rights related articles and also promote drafts article expansion having info or knowledge gaps. For example w:My body, my choice is substantially contributed by me but English language not being my native language I am too dependent on c/e support.

Even if Kerala: Cleric disappointed over school award organisers inviting girl student on the stage does not get approval this time I wish to learn here how to be on same page of the reviewers here, hence I will prefer to have specific inputs and c/e help if possible.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 03:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Since it looks like this article is going to time out anyway, @Bookku:, I would rather not. But ping me the next time you have a draft working and I will gladly polish up the English. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks That would be very nice of you. Bookku (talk) 14:41, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

United States Supreme Court overturns decades-old abortion decision

You did a great job in United States Supreme Court overturns decades-old abortion decision. Here are a couple of comments:

• terminology such as (Mississippi law limiting abortion to) no longer than 15 weeks into pregnancy" should be changed to " no longer than 13 weeks from conception. Why everyone uses terminology that has been favored by physicians who have their own convenient way of counting the weeks of pregnancy as starting from the end of the last menstrual cycle is anyone's guess. But for the sake of factual accuracy we should count abortion from the moment of conception, don't you agree? This will set WN as a pioneer in reporting
• possibly remove "acquire pills for medication abortion, " (see comment below re economic inequality)

For future articles there will be many angles to cover:

• trigger laws in terms of weeks after conception. In other words, since abortion law is now regulated differently in every state, it would be good to know the # of week after conception limiting abortions in every state. btw I saw a useful map somewhere showing what states have enabled trigger laws, which allow abortion, and which have not changed. IIRC only 16 states now allow abortion.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Abortion_by_country shows 114 articles in en-wikipedia about abortion by country
• economic equality issue - only relatively well-to-do women will be able to afford abortions in states that prohibit abortions because of prohibitive travel costs (medicated abortions must still be supervised by a physician, I think?)
• this will completely change society, not only women. Sex outside of marriage will return to the taboo it was, men will have to marry women who they have impregnated, women careers outside the home will suffer and with it educational institutions will suffer a loss of women students, etc.
• Companies -there have already been reports about companies that help employees access abortions
  • SEE: These companies are helping employeesaccess abortions
• Canada and Mexico will have to brace for an huge increase demand for abortions, which is already causing debate in Canada, at least, about the shortage of abortion facilities. Abortion costs in Canada are cpaid for by universal health coverage Ottawahitech (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Just found this on commons:

There are more in: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Abortion_maps_of_the_United_States Ottawahitech (talk) 14:36, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech: This post belongs on the article's own talk page where anyone who wants to work on the article will see it. I have to run, but I agree about your "future angles" section. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Please explain this revert

This is what I'm talking about. Why did you revert that? If a user wishes to remove their own comments, why are you reverting that? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 16:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

An IP posted a post. The same IP removed that post. We do not have a case of one person removing a different person's post. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

This is exactly my point. An IP posted something and removed their own post. You readded it. Why? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 21:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I see. You weren't asking why I removed someone else's post. You're asking why I re-added it. I see you do not have any form of private messaging enabled. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I exist on IRC...but thats about it...yes. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:11, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

If you're still curious, PM me. I just rejoined the Wikipedia channel and I'm on the Simple English Wikipedia channel as well. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24 whats the simple IRC channel? But honestly I prefer on-wiki communication Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

The IRC for simple.wiki, the Simple English Wikipedia. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24 I know, whats the link... Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to know the answer also please, if you wouldn't mind. Gryllida (talk) 03:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a message privately. I trust you to be as discreet as is reasonably practical. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24 would it be possible to tell me too... Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

My preference would be 1) Gryllida tells you "okay, it's clear there's no funny business going on" and you take G at G's word but 2) if it would cause disruption to leave you in suspense, then enable a private mode of communication. I don't see you at #wikinews-en right now.

So stop and think. Where are you on the spectrum between "need to know for concrete practical reason" and "just curious"? Darkfrog24 (talk) 18:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24 if Gryllida says its okay I'm fine with that (although I now think I actually know what it is). It won't cause disruption. My place on that spectrum is that someone should know why "it's clear there's no funny business going on" because said revert is a bit strange, I don't care who it is. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida has Darkfrog24 provided some satisfactory explaination of this to you? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:10, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

The revert and the additional edit re-adding the same content signed properly helped to revdel the previous revisions and hide the exposed IP. Gryllida (talk) 20:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida Thank you Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

side note

There is a rule, which may or may not be written somewhere (let me know if you would like to see it), that communication with other contributors needs to be concise. Not everything thought of in your mind needs to come out: some things may be left unsaid if they are not going to lead to good consequences (being understood correctly, leading to other people or yourself doing good things). When something does need to be said, the "way" or "manner", and also "timing", both matter a lot regarding how effectively the desired outcome is achieved.

So a contributor constantly makes choices

• whether a thing needs to be said
• if yes, then how and when to say it

I would like to note to you that some of your communications, and choices, are lacking one or more of these things.

Suggesting to be more selective about what you are writing and more prompt to let others know your availability and commitment in the case it is reduced.

If I know I am away this weekend, I won't start a draft, or I will but I will tell others that I am planning to be away.

If I see a contributor who is of another opinion, I have to be strategic about how I write to them: am I trying to persuade them or not? Is it going to work or is it going to result in no changes to their mindset?

There is a news writing mission, it does not work if contributors are distracted.

Suggesting you to think one step ahead, anticipating responses from others and whether this is what you want to achieve, before you post. Gryllida (talk) 10:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm already doing that, Gryllida. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I was suggesting that this is not the case. I am worried. I will give you three examples.

• Often after writing a draft, when someone provides feedback, you don't revise.
• The drafts include background mixed with newsworthy information. Inverted pyramid is not followed. This was in recent Maori story. Thinking ahead, this can easily be avoided leading to the story being published.
• Picking on words. There was some word-- "suggested" or "recommendation", I don't remember which -- which led you to write, with several days delay, that you didn't and don't want to edit this because the proposed changes are "not required" i e. "are optional".
• At talk page of Me Da Wikipedian you proposed to share your point of view despite the discussion including phrases such as "persona non grata" and "not making this talk page tourist attraction" (from Acagastya) and Bddpaux remarking elsewhere that the user being here is highly inappropriate and they need to conpletely go away, even from their own talk page. (Phrase "adding fuel to fire" comes to mind).

I am sure that for each of the above there can be a valid reason and motivation however I am concerned that things like these are not entirely helpful for efficient news writing and may drive good people away as a result of the lack of interest in actual results being achieved quickly and without noise.

There is no AGF here. If a comment is noisy it is not assumed that the contributor didn't know or was confused. If a draft is not structured properly, good faith is not assumed. Not unless there is a good reason to.

I don't need justification of any of the above points. I am only hoping that this is something that you can improve in future edits - that is more important to me. Gryllida (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like you're concerned that I didn't engage with your review of the one article I drafted recently. That is deliberate. You and I have too much history. A reviewer may make suggestions or commands that I may choose not to act on. My attempts to explain in the past resulted in fights. I quietly accepted that the article would succeed or fail without me because experience has shown me that this is the best thing to do.

My one and only comment on Me Da's block was posted before Acagastya made the "tourist attraction" post ("persona non grata" does not show up on CTRL-F). Since this is the second time this week you've noted that I did not follow orders/suggestions/etc. that had not yet been posted, I will feel free to ask you to check the timestamps next time. I observe that many users spoke on Me Da's talk page, but you do not seem to have posted on their talk pages about it.

I invite you to use my history here at Wikinews to evaluate the review system, drafter retention, and article quality and save the site, with or without my direct help. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:33, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

It is not about "orders". It is about your expectation of the direct (i.e. what Gryllida or Me Da Wikipedian will reply to you) and indirect (how this will affect others and their involvement) responses.

I don't think my comments at the Maori story were too ... nostalgic of a "history" between us two. They were rather clear and non controversial. To me. I tried to invest my time and effort into being clearer to you than I was previously. I was trying to think of the "direct" response.

The other aspect, the "indirect" one. Other contributors didn't have any way to know that you walked away from the article.

So instead of saying "Gryllida, your comments didn't look required, looked optional" next year.

Why not call things their proper names? Write "I didn't like your feedback yesterday, Gryllida, and I don't like your comments today either. They still suffer the same problems. Specifically this and that and that".

And why not write "I am not going to edit this article, communication with you, Gryllida, is more than I am willing to bear today"?

Plus even if I am annoying or incompetent in the feedback I write, at least some improvement could be devised from the noise I made. The inverted pyramid wasn't followed, that's pretty unambiguous.

Why not do it straight away, so that someone has a chance to edit the article for you, instead of waiting?

Maybe there is a reason why you did it differently to what I wrote above. I would be curious to hear it.

-------

It seems to me that you care of direct response (Gryllida left a message, yoi didn't reply, therefore Gryllida won't bother you) but nothing of the indirect one (others await your answers, don't touch the story, consider you unresponsive therefore the desire to jump in and edit diminishes, etc), consider you shy and slow (as you don't call things their proper names straight away). These aspects might matter a lot in a group of more than two people.

(I tend to jump in after author is away for 12 hours, but only for stories I can understand. Names of New Zealand monarchs is too much for me. It did seem your knowledge of it was unique and not possessed by someone else.) Gryllida (talk) 20:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to engage with the review process in a different way because doing so can to prevent the kind of trouble we had years ago. I said I had a plan, and I meant and mean it. If that means you prefer to spend your volunteered time and energy elsewhere, that's only fair. Hopefully, we will fix up the site and get so many more drafters that our history won't matter. Darkfrog24 (talk) 12:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)