User talk:Janweh64

I watch talk pages where I have recently left messages. Please reply in the same section to make discussion easier to follow.
If you leave a message on this page, I'll reply to it here.

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) 19:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Rebel faction arrives in Addis Ababa for peace talks

I'm hoping there's a more recent development that can be used to freshen this article. --Pi zero (talk) 14:47, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Not that I have found right now. But I will research for a follow up. Janweh64 (talk) 14:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I see the problem (per your comments) is freshness... I will go back to see if more recent info can be found now. Before republishing.

It's an interesting story. There ought to be some sort of further developments from it, if not yet then soon.

Mostly likely the article should be refocused, so that while the existing material might remain, the headline and lede are about the latest development. Refreshing an article usually works that way, so that the focal event itself is only a day or two old when the article is submitted for review. Occasionally an article is refreshed with new information come to light within a day or two, and the focal event remains unchanged — but then the focal event still has to be within seven days, and this one seems to have happened on either the 23rd or the 25th. --Pi zero (talk) 15:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I can find no new information so far. And this article does not seem to pass the Wikinews requirements for news worthiness. Even though the events occurred with in the past week (Sunday Dec 23 to be exact) there are no sources more recent than this Sudantimes article. Which was published on Dec 27 but written on Dec 25. Does this disqualify this article? If so go ahead and delete it. It was a good first article practice. I will move on or wait for more developments before republishing. I have saved a copy for my own records. Janweh64 (talk) 15:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Can you give me a full review anyway? Assuming, I wrote this say on Dec. 25. It would help me improve. I plan on writting more Horn of Africa articles which Wikinews seriously lacks. I have save the article here. ---Janweh64 (talk) 15:40, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Here is something interesting. This website claims this is an official press release from the ONLF, claiming that there are no peace talks and that this is a propanganda campaign. The websites reporting seems very biased. But the claim in its self seems news worthy to me. Janweh64 (talk) 15:51, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

The purported official press release is indeed interesting, and if the article were able to achieve freshness with its current focus that would probably be worth mentioning. I think, though, the article really needs a different focus; arrival for the talks appears to have happened seven or eight days ago, and more importantly the fact the talks were going on appears to have come to light seven days ago.

Here's an important thing to keep in mind about freshness: when the information comes to light is important. This isn't necessarily the same as when the event happened, and it also isn't necessarily the same as when a source article was published. Sometimes something happens and the public doesn't know about it till a few days later (if it's many days later, or even longer, one may want to explicitly focus on the announcement rather than on the thing it's an announcement of). Sometimes an article gets published days later but doesn't contain any information that wasn't already available, so as a source it wouldn't actually help to fresh a Wikinews article. --Pi zero (talk) 16:30, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• Since you're hanging on to a copy in userspace anyway, shall I userfy the article instead of deleting it, so you have the most up-to-date version along with its talk page? --Pi zero (talk) 13:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

That would be great thanks. For historical record! :) Janweh64 (talk) 03:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Done --Pi zero (talk) 12:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Categories

We don't create a category until we have at least three published articles (not just written, but published) to put in it. When categories get created with fewer than that many articles to populate them, they're ripe for deletion. That's why, for example, we have categories for some Indian states but not for others. --Pi zero (talk) 18:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Gotcha... can we retain the associated redirects though? I don't want to a conflict of names in the future. Janweh64 (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Also can you REDIRECT | Ethiopia > Portal:Ethiopia . It currently redirects to Category:Ethiopia Janweh64 (talk) 18:31, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I see many articles from the past that should be categorized under these state categories. Is there no way to add these categories to these articles?

In reverse order,

• If we've got at least three articles that should go in a state category, there's no problem. Yes, we add categories to archived articles. There are, in fact, hundreds of articles [categories] we could create, the only reason we haven't done so being the labor involved (i.e., we haven't gotten around to it). For the past year and a half or two years, I've been doing a little categorization work each day, which has made a small dent in the whole of what wants doing. (For perspective: I keep track of my long-term categorization projects here.)
• Portals are an idea Wikinews had early on, before we realized it doesn't work well for us — too labor intensive. Nowadays, when we get around to it, we systematically change redirects to go to the categories instead of the portals. There have been suggestions we should just delete all the portals... but then, there's the chance with some more automation we might someday be able to make the portals work better.
• A key device for helping us manage our categorization of articles is the {{w}} template. If it detects its target in Wikinews mainspace, it links to that, otherwise it links to Wikipedia. So we don't want a redirect with a given name unless it has a target we want to send readers to.

--Pi zero (talk) 19:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Iranian Navy conducts drills in Strait of Hormuz

Congrats on publication. :-)  And thanks for rescuing the article (it's my impression there were real-world concerns that prevented IDangerMouse from revising it after first submission).

I didn't say anything in review comments, but you may (if you hadn't already) wish to take a look at the detailed history of edits during review. --Pi zero (talk) 21:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I just went through it one diff at a time. Wow! I do not envy you. It is not easy reviewing these articles. Is an article by a more experienced writer much smoother. Or is that typical? Janweh64 (talk) 00:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Heh. This is why we need more tools to help with reviewing.

The most time-consuming types of problems do tend to be things that get less common with more writing experience; stuff that's a little bit out of bounds can be very difficult to review. But then again, more experienced writers may write more ambitious articles. (I'm especially proud of my part, as reviewer, in helping the On the campaign trail series happen; a very experienced writer, html comments inline to make reviewing easier, and yet those were typically about nine-hour reviews.) --Pi zero (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)