User talk:InfantGorilla

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

Discuss[edit]

:/[edit]

Heh, I facepalmed. Oops... Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

If I had a punt for every time I ... :) --InfantGorilla (talk) 20:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Why did you self-publish ?[edit]

Why did you self-publish this? -- Cirt (talk) 08:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I didn't write it: Bobby122 did. The edits you see are my copy-edits - I fixed a few errors in the posted article, and added 2 sources to update the weather report that Bobby122 posted. It was sailing close to the wind on self-publish, but I don't think I crossed the line. --InfantGorilla (talk) 08:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
It was a self-publish. Please, do not do this again. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 08:56, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
I reviewed it and published it. Please see discussion, at Wikinews:Water_cooler/policy#Does_making_a_new_article_from_a_prior_existing_and_then_publishing_it_count_as_a_self-publish_violation.3F. -- Cirt (talk) 09:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)
  • I guess you feel I crossed the line, though I didn't hide anything and no-one else commented in 16 hours. For the record, this is the diff:
  • //en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Ten_dead,_nine_injured_as_Super_Typhoon_Megi_clears_Philippines&action=historysubmit&diff=1115879&oldid=1115698
  • The diff has lots of red text, mostly because I deleted several sentences and switched around the order of the paragraphs.
  • I won't review again after I have made this extent of edits, unless others comment that my publish was legit.
--InfantGorilla (talk) 09:11, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Nothing personal, it may be an honest assumption - but it opens the door to others taking this model down a slippery slope. Surely you can see that? -- Cirt (talk) 09:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I see that. It is absolutely a legit discussion to have. We need a line in the sand somewhere. --InfantGorilla (talk) 09:21, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Missing photo[edit]

It must be a mistake at the University of Winchester, because I can't upload this:

An aerial photograph released by the University of Winchester for news use

Fair use asserted for identification and description of the subject in the article Archaeologists uncover Britain's earliest known hospital

--InfantGorilla (talk) 23:35, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I think it is slashdotted! --InfantGorilla (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The server is no longer overloaded, but the link to the photo still doesn't work. Oh well, it will be too late to add to the article soon. --InfantGorilla (talk) 11:24, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

FAC[edit]

I was thinking of closing the FAC for the Aussie teachers article, but first I'd like you to comment on if you'd had any further thoughts on your comment. If you were opposed to it passing without more discussion based on that, I'd be inclined to leave the nom. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 17:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

No - these discussion shouldn't stay open for ever. It looks to me like it passed, which will make me proud. People have had a chance to respond to my comments and didn't: that is fine. In a nutshell, the story is an example of a Wikinewsie working pretty damn hard on a tricky story, even though he would have to have worked even harder to reach a standard that I would call 'right'. Whether that qualifies it to be an FA or not, I don't know, which is why I didn't vote. --InfantGorilla (talk) 16:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for the link fix! Much appreciated! ;) Care to review/pub? -- Cirt (talk) 20:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Hehe, Diego beat me to it. I got too involved in a stealthy c/e, so I was too slow. I got edit-conflicted, so I submitted my ideas for re-flagging. --InfantGorilla (talk) 21:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

fetch·comms 22:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

<wave>[edit]

- Amgine | t 13:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Life is! Happy to still see your username occasionally in RC. And I won't even ask you take a look at [insert very interesting current news event here]... <grin> - Amgine | t 20:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

privs[edit]

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.

--Pi zero (talk) 21:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

?[edit]

Where ya' been of-late? --Bddpaux (talk) 03:26, 31 October 2013 (UTC)