User talk:Koavf

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


Koavf, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these!

Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews:

There are always things to do on Wikinews:

By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Bawolff ☺☻Smile.png 04:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation receives copyright infringement claim from Mormon Church[edit]

From w:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, widely known as the LDS Church or the Mormon Church..." I went with "Mormon Church" because this is a "widely known" name as well, and to use the entire "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" is very very long in the headline of an article. I hope you do not mind if I move it back. Cirt (talk) 04:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I respect your opinion, though I also respectfully disagree, as a perusal of similar types of news stories about this organization seems to hold that "Mormon Church", is used more frequently than "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". Thanks for the polite response. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


Thank you for taking the time to point out the transcription error in this article about Noam Chomsky. I had to listen to it several times before I was sure exactly what he said. Good ears;). Gopher65talk 23:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Moving images to Commons[edit]

Hi. Just wanted to explain a bit why I rv'd your seemingly perfectly reasonable edit on the image. I don't particularly dispute the point about it being ineligible for copyright. The thing is, though, there's a long and tragic history of Commons dissing Wikinews by deleting stuff (with neither warning nor notification) we are using and cannot replace, but which we could almost always upload locally under fair use if we knew it was about to happen. There's probably... usually... no malice at all involved, either, but one can't help thinking if Commons cared to it could easily set up an infrastructure to check whether a pending deletion would cause problems for a sister project that allows local uploads, and either notify them or even automatically do a local upload with some sort of copyright-justification-needed-within-x-amount-of-time tag. The worst incident I've seen was a Wikinews article we published with an image that had been sitting happily on Commons for something like six or seven years, and then a little more than a day after we published our article, while it was the number one lead on our main page so that this image was the single most prominent image displayed on our entire site, Commons deleted it. The icing on the cake was, this was just after the article was more than 24 hours post-publication, so that our archive policy had kicked in (the reason we can't replace most images that get deleted out from under us). So, once we've uploaded something locally, we're not likely to voluntarily delete it in favor of moving to Commons, making ourselves more vulnerable to the mishap of Commons deletion. --Pi zero (talk) 14:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay But if it gets deleted there, you can undelete it here. —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:47, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Hm. An interesting thought, except that we don't know when an image we use here is deleted there. --Pi zero (talk) 13:42, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Files You could have a tracking category like Articles_with_missing_files. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
There are about... I think it's around 450 articles in our archives with missing images. Two and a fraction percent of our entire archive. Only earlier this year I created a template {{missing image}} to try to at least neatify the articles involved. Small as Wikinews is, we need less stuff to keep track of, rather than more.
In the specific instance, though, I concede that if the image were ever deleted from Commons, sooner or later we would presumably notice and would then find it especially easy to fix. --Pi zero (talk) 20:32, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama[edit]

I hope this was an error here, I can't possibly see how anyone could argue the D.L. is not a Theologian. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:24, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


Was that edit at the user's request? It's hard to follow what's going on here, locally. The impression I get hunting around is that Sarah's position at the WMF is over, is that correct? BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 14:22, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Microchip08 (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Blood Red Sandman I notified her on en.voy. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:55, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


I saw that you'd requested Reviewer status some time ago....doesn't look like much has happened re: that request. It seems you've done some cat'ing around here (thanks for that!!). Outside of that, have you done much else in term of proofreading etc.? I think (if I'm interpreting things properly) you are into Wikidata a bit (a project FAR BEYOND the scope of my expertise). --Bddpaux (talk) 22:56, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

@Bddpaux: You can see all of my WMF edits here, of course: Special:CentralAuth/Koavf. As you can see, I've been most active in sheer number of edits on en.wp, commons, data,, en.voy, and en.wikt. I've tried to do more on non-Wikipedia projects over the past two years and although I may not be as familiar with the norms at en.wn, I don't think reviewer is too much to ask considering my history here and elsewhere on WMF projects. If you do, that's fair. Alternately, if you have in mind some threshold I should cross, let me know. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:01, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
That's cool and I'm with you there. But considering what I'd said in the comments section over on your request, the 'general' flow here goes: Newbie, Reporter, Accredited Reporter, Reviewer (aka 'Editor'), Administrator (and a few beyond that -- but those cross into inter-wiki roles). Now, what I just said is not canonical by any means! But reviewers spend a lot of time here reading, re-reading, proof'ing and taking action on article submissions (again, functioning as a news editor). It's not a glory-filled job...I can assure you!! I have no questions about your roles/contributions across the span of WMF, but 'Reviewer' means something REAL SPECIFIC here in these parts. So, if you REALLY WANT to, you're welcome to lurk here for a while, doing some plain-old copy edits and what-not (user Pi Zero has even taken action to make a lot of those mundane things a bit easier of-late). From there, we'll see where things can go. If others think your congealed meta-role qualifies you to be a reviewer here, then I'm willing to listen, but as user Blood Red Sandman pointed out, taking that route worked out badly in the past. We've seen (in the past) that users who come here, puffed up, looking for some badge-of-honor before proving themselves tend to create more problems than they fix and then run away mad. (I'm not accusing you of being one of those people, heck, I don't know you); but God's-honest humility is the order-of-the-day around here if things are to succeed. --Bddpaux (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Not sure I'd go quite as far as to say it's normal to get Accredited Reporter before Reviewer, but it's certainly known. Accredited Reporter is based entirely on trust, so a user with little track record on Wikinews can get it if they're trusted by the community (although it's most common for users to do some writing first, then apply). For reviewer, it's not as high-trust. Trust is an element, of course, but reviewer is about competence with Wikinews policies and processes. I'm not aware of any other priv on any wiki where competence is required to be demonstrated in quite the way it is for reviewer. Write a couple of articles a week for, say, a month and the community will likely be tripping over itself to hand you reviewer. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 19:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)