User talk:Pi zero/Archive 16

Please do not edit the contents of this page. It is for historical reference only.

---

Portal:Drink

Thanks for pointing that out. I have left a message at the bot operators talkpage. Green Giant (talk) 00:10, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

A thank you is in order

I saw you flagged the profane articles by a, I want to believe is just disgruntled, individual. On be half of the rest of us, thank you for speedy action. AZOperator (talk) 02:10, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/216.49.124.184

Time for a short-term IP block perhaps? Green Giant (talk) 15:19, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I see I'd given them a one-hour block, earlier. Sometimes that's enough, after all. Gave them longer this time. --Pi zero (talk) 16:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Aye, that should give them some time to ruminate. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 16:02, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion request

Hey, Please delete User_talk:Jamiebally, as an editor asked to take this username. Thanks! 1997kB (talk) 03:57, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

@1997kB: It looked to me as if the redirect had been pointing to the page to be moved into it, so that it ought to have happened with no problem had it not been edited. The info provided at the speedy-delete tag checked out, though, and it's done. --Pi zero (talk) 11:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Template:DANGI VIA GBARA

I'm not sure what to do about this template. The user seems to be excited to be on wikis but I don't think they fully understood what a template is for. It doesn't seem to fit any speedy deletion criteria, so I'm thinking maybe it might be best to move it into userspace? Your thoughts, please? Green Giant (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Filter for WP0 abuse

Hi! Could you create a Special:AbuseFilter for WP0 uploads? You can copy it from w:fi:Toiminnot:Väärinkäyttösuodatin/153. After this they can't upload copyviolated files (like File:Don G ft Masta It Is What It Iz.mp3) in this wiki. The same filter is already enabled on many wikis. Stryn (talk) 13:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Stryn: I'll look into it. I've never been comfortable with the abuse filter (yet another gratuitously introduced different language). --Pi zero (talk) 13:46, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Well, I tried. However, each time I tried to save the filter, it erased what I'd entered in the conditions field, and refused to save on the grounds that the conditions field is required. (Only supporting, to my thinking, the general principle that it's a fundamentally bad design strategy to be introducing separate languages and interfaces for these things.) --Pi zero (talk) 12:46, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't know what went wrong then, but because this wiki is abused a lot (most of all WMF wikis) of those uploads, I changed the filter 26 to match and prevent from uploading those copyviolations on this wiki. Stryn (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Hopefully that will do the trick. Thanks. --Pi zero (talk) 13:32, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

WP0 Abuse

Hello, I don't speak english very well, my home wiki is portuguese wikipedia there I'm rollback end autoviewer

I come here to give you delete all WP0 files that find here

FranciscoMG (talk) 18:51, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Moving over redirects

I was a little surprised by this edit because I didn’t know that new users on WN could move pages over redirects. I noted it in RC, where the user appeared to have shown up in the deletion log! Green Giant (talk) 21:15, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

That surprised me too. But their account was created on September 10, 2017 -- and maybe move is allowed after certain days. Or maybe they reached threshold edits but were later deleted (I guess).
•–• 21:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

WHY YOU DELETE MY NEWS

YOU ARE STUPID Arie sata (talk) 02:33, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello Arie sata,

1) In the aim to follow Wikinews mission of informing the readers of current events, we don't publish stories less than three paragraphs long. Doing this would simply not inform them of the essence of the event. Please see content guide and style guide carefully.

2) I'd like to help you with one story, and asked you a few questions about it at your talk page. If you could answer these questions then it could increase chances of its completion and publication.

--Gryllida (talk) 03:08, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Email "Checking potential wikilinks"

I have sent you a mail on your gmail ID. Please try it.
•–• 05:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I guess I lost some rights

I have left a note on #wikinews -- can you grant me those rights again? I can't even move pages now.
•–• 06:11, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Original discussion at AAA. Gryllida (talk) 10:21, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

abuse filter — suggestion

I would like to recommend that you implement a nice simple filter that we have found effective at meta

It has proved successful against the bots. After reviewing this, please delete the visible filter components, no need to overly advertise. As a little as you are down on active administrators, that the global abuse filters can be active here if the community displays that consensus. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:11, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

2018 ArbCom elections

I would like to nominate you for this season's ArbCom. Would you mind accepting the nomination?
•–• 23:20, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@Acagastya: I accept. --Pi zero (talk) 23:35, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

rookie

im a newbie i need guidance. i see u have been on wikinews for some time. any encouragement would help thank you. Gazamosq33 (talk) 10:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Gazamosq33. To start with, you should take a look at Wikinews:Pillars of writing, which is a compact overview of basic principles of what we do here; that covers a lot in just a little space. Then, there is a tutorial on writing a first article here at Wikinews:Writing an article. There's another way of thinking about the writing process — same ideas, just different way of presenting them — at Wikinews:Article wizard.

We say our initial learning curve is steep but, thankgfully, short; you never stop learning, here, but once you've got the basics its a lot easier. For the particular article you've started: Evidently you have chosen your focal event. Choose your sources; we require at least two mutually independent sources; cite them in the sources section (I've provided frameworks for the template calls, just write in each relevant field value after the "=") and, we strongly recommend, read the the sources before you start to write (well, you've started, a bit, but, read the sources, and perhaps rethink how to write: you need to write in a way that doesn't copy passages from elsewhere: information from eleswhere, but your own words). Your lede should succinctly answer as many as reasonably possible of the five Ws and an H about your focal event, and in the process it should establish that your focal event is newsworthy; especially important is showing that the event is fresh (the other elements of newsworthiness, relevance and specificity, seem pretty clear in this case), for which you need to say what day the focal event happened — that's "when", one of the five Ws. I notice you also need to touch on "where" in your lede, and remember to write for an international audience (you need to include an extra word or three so they know where in the world Miami Lakes is). After the lede, you need at least two more paragraphs, in an inverted pyramid giving more details and background, with total text adding up to at least three or four times as many words as you have now so as to meet our minimal article requirements. It needs to be finished promptly (always, because with news there is a deadline), and submitted for review by an authorized reviewer such as myself.

Feel free to ask me questions. (I'll be away for a bit this morning (local time), but shall return.) --Pi zero (talk) 11:13, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Why did you delete lickety?

That is not nice! Aaron Giebel (talk) 16:42, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Aaron Giebel: Well, it clearly wasn't news. Some versions of it were a bit spammy. If you want to experiment with wiki editing, use the sandbox. If you might be interested in contributing, take a look at Wikinews:Pillars of writing, and then if you decide to take the plunge, there's a tutorial on writing a first article at Wikinews:Writing an article. --Pi zero (talk) 19:00, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not just a newslaper, pi zero it is more

... I actually don't know but I think it is a dictionary —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aaron Giebel (talk • contribs) 01:30, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikinews is not Wikipedia. --Pi zero (talk) 01:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Reply: oh.

Oh

Oh Aaron Giebel (talk) 01:44, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Am I to delete a conversation after it was replied, to? Thanks.

If not, I'm sorry Aaron Giebel (talk) 01:47, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Accepted. Now you know. :-)  --Pi zero (talk) 01:49, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I'll try the sandbox

. Aaron Giebel (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank You

In New to this :) Aaron Giebel (talk) 01:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

:-)  --Pi zero (talk) 02:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Recent problem

Hi. The recent comments here were flagged for my attention. It looks like it's over, so best I don't step in it. Should there be a wider pattern of trolling on gender, on any of our projects, I would be interested in keeping an eye on it and would welcome an off-wiki note. Should there be an on-going pattern it is both worth considering revisiting policies local to Wikinews or other projects where discussion may be getting hijacked, and/or going back to the WMF's terms of use and seeing if a refinement or specific resolution might help ensure policies reflect the top level mission.

Thanks for deescalating this case.

Cheers --Fæ (talk) 17:34, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

So finally, it is over

Dealing with the group stage was a pain in the arse. Dealing with my mood swings, I believe, was harder. Congratulations. We have the entire set of the World Cup match reports and we can also have tonnes of categories. Thanks for reviewing 1000000 match reports! Here is a barnstar for that!

.
223.237.199.112 (talk) 10:46, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Page to be deleted

Please, can you remove these page. I had created it

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gioelebarb (talk • contribs) 04:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Gioelebarb: Generally, to delete the user talk page of a registered account would require a request from the owning account. --Pi zero (talk) 11:05, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I created the account, but after all these years I forgot the login information, please delete the page. Gioelebarb 16:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate the awkwardness of that situation, but the simplest situation is just to leave it alone and forget about it; it doesn't appear to be doing any harm. --Pi zero (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the category message

(Inspired from the tool I wanted to make to alert me for article rename before publishing), this script logs "test 0". Now, I don't know the architecture or the flow of dialog tools, but can you have a look?

That also reminds me of the ECMAScript state-based question we were discussing one day, but you did not want to predict what was happening. (I should cut some of the time I spend on-wiki to complete that project)
•–• 04:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

scripts and database

I am deleting those scripts and the database it was updating. After all, I was subscribed to DBaaS and just like how wiki-* is not a personal web-host, I should not use that DBaaS for Wikinews. And after all, "not everyone needs that tool".
103.254.128.86 (talk) 10:46, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of news articles

Speaking of news articles, is original research even allowed? Educator57 (talk) 11:28, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, User:Educator57. :-)  On Wikinews, "OR" stands for "original reporting", and it's not only allowed, it's the most valued —and most difficult— form of reporting we do. Before you can do OR, you have to first write a bunch of synthesis, till you can consistently produce articles that can pass review on their first try and till you've earned a good reputation here (see the bit about "accumulated reputation" at Wikinews:Never assume), and then you have to extra work when gathering information and when documenting it for us. The results are, at best, quite excellent; linkWikinews:Dialog/do.

There's a compact overview of what we do here at Wikinews:Pillars of writing. --Pi zero (talk) 12:32, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Yea, also practice copy editing others' submissions maybe, useful to do when / before writing synthetis articles. Gryllida 12:49, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

What about the fact-checking part of original reporting? Educator57 (talk) 00:22, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

OR has to be heavily documented; the documentation is different in character from that of a synthesis article, is all. A rule of thumb says, when writing OR, aim to provide lots more documentation than necessary, rather than aiming for "enough". --Pi zero (talk) 01:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

That, of course, is after having gained the experience and earned the reputation. --Pi zero (talk) 01:24, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Some kind of original reporting involves writing about what you saw or heard, first-hand ("I saw 50 people attended the protest. I saw Bob Smith gave a talk") and others involve the reporter contacting a third party who can give such answers (perhaps this can be called second-hand so to speak? perhaps there is a better word or phrase for this). In the latter case checking the facts is pretty straightforward: the reporter sends a copy of the message they received from the third party to a reviewers' internal address. In the former case however it is difficult to check - perhaps the reporter made a mistake or is intentionally lying. This needs to be prevented. There are several mechanisms:

0) First-hand reporting requires evidence: notes taken, photos, videos, copies of conference programmes, and the like. This could be faked, but I don't think this occurred previously, and then we have other mechanisms listed below.

1) Expectation that reporters contribute for a few months reporting based on existing publications (synthetis) first which is easier to check, then based on replies from third parties (OR-interviews) and only then the contributor may be blessed with Accreditation to report first-hand. As the brain is wired with a tendency to believe easier than to disbelieve, and as fact checking requires having the ability to disbelieve (or, more precisely, to never assume), such continuous contribution would allow others to see whether the author has (or is willing to build) this wonderful and rare skill.

2) Reviewers aim to fact check based on existing published data.

3) Article talk page is available for readers to raise their concerns about misleading information, and a {{correction}} may be added if published articles contain wrong information.

Writing wrong information (due to negligence or due to malice) is really discouraged and is against the policies, you see. I hope this manner of explaining it is not wrong (I don't think I fully explained this to anyone before; as a first attempt at explaining, this may be confusing in some ways). Hope it helps. Gryllida (chat) 02:30, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Copyvio

I noticed that when you redacted today's edits on the Pakistan satellite article, you removed them for copyright violation. I am requesting that this edit be hidden as well, because it is the edit which introduced the problematic content, and your edit above it merely added the "under review" template to the article. Inner Focus (talk) 00:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Thought I'd nixed that one at the same time; done now. Thanks. --Pi zero (talk) 01:05, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Boss for Real Madrid Julen Lopetegui warns Messi not to doubt squad

Hi Pi when you get a chance could you look over my developing article on Real Madrid and Messi's comments on Madrid? thank you. I really hope to get it published! Krimpins (talk) 03:39, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Krimpins: Hi. I added some required elements. Those should be added automatically when creating an article using one of the article creation forms scattered about the site, such as the one at Wikinews:Writing an article.

You'll want to set up the source articles to use the {{source}} template: I provided a skeleton of a call to that template, which you complete by writing the values of the fields after the "=" on each line. The lede should be in past tense (like the rest of the article) and should be a short, to-the-point paragraph briefly summarizing the focal event by succinctly answering as many as reasonably possible of the WN:five Ws and an H; it should be written to be understood by an international audience, and should explain the significance of the event and show it's newsworthy (which includes freshness, so the lede should specify on what day the focal event occurred). If you haven't looked over Wikinews:Pillars of writing, I recommend it. --Pi zero (talk) 03:47, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Just wanted to inform you that I've done some 'clean-up' on the article. Leaderboard (talk) 04:27, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Krimpins: I looked at the article and was puzzled. The sources do not appear to be about the story reported. See my review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 04:33, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Block request

Hello, could you please block 185.46.76.35? This is a troll from he.wiki. Thanks, Guycn2 (talk) 17:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Guycn2: Why do you think this is a troll from he.wiki? I'd like to understand.

(It appears the IP is restoring explicit IP data to some pages, which is not necessarily wrong, as en.wn does not remove interwikis once the information is also available on Wikidata. It appears in this case to be information that did get removed, for some reason, and I'm not even sure why that happened; perhaps there was a reason that made sense at the time but I've now forgotten. At some point in the future we hope to have semi-automation to compare our local interwikis to what's on Wikidata, offering help to possibly correct any discrepancy between two two either by changing the local interwiki or by changing Wikidata; but we don't have that yet, and in the meantime, although we don't remove local interwikis as a rule, we mostly don't go to a whole lot of trouble to add them when they aren't already there, either.) --Pi zero (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

He/she was blocked on he.wiki a few years ago. Since then, he/she methodically reverts edits made by me and other editors using various IP addresses and usernames. This IP's global edits may be useful.

As for this specific edit, I removed these interwiki links in 2014 as they were moved to Wikidata and are no longer necessary. Guycn2 (talk) 17:38, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Guycn2: I did notice they reverted some edits of yours on en.wb that were in the opposite direction, so I'm willing to believe the point of the edits wasn't what they did to the pages involved but simply that they were undoing something you did.

As I mentioned, we don't, as a rule, remove interwikis here just because they're also on Wikidata. (We don't subscribe to the theory that local interwikis cease to serve a useful purpose when the information is also on Wikidata.) Just atm it's not a big deal, though, so I'm not particularly inclined to bother with undoing those removals; they'd need carefully checking anyway, since we don't yet have that semi-automation set up. --Pi zero (talk) 19:13, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the explanation. Regards, Guycn2 (talk) 19:54, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Airplane crashes into ocean in Micronesia

Hi Pi, I noticed you put the above article on indefinite SP as a "standard precaution". What's all that about? This is a 'Wiki' isn't it? BTW, I've done work on Wikipedia, but never anything here on Wikinews. Thanks. 5.81.164.16 (talk) 18:49, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we're a wiki, though what we do is different from what Wikipedia does and there are various differences in procedure because of that. Our articles get semi-protected once published, which we didn't used to do until full archiving (when they're retired from the main page), but there's noticeably more random, senseless drive-by vandalism these past couple of years.

There's a compact overview of what we do here at Wikinews:Pillars of writing. If you're interested in contributing, we recommend registering a personal account, as users are, well, individuals on Wikinews in a sense that doesn't occur on Wikipedia; we're interested in each individual's accumulated reputation, and it's impossible to know for sure who we're dealing with unless you've got a registered personal account. (See Wikinews:Never assume.) --Pi zero (talk) 19:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Looks like you need to update or rewrite this: [ https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Protection_policy] (and remove the last line of it). It might also be appropriate to clarify that Jimbo's policy of "you can edit this article right now" doesn't apply here. 5.81.164.16 (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

That principle has exceptions even on Wikipedia. --Pi zero (talk) 20:15, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Since you wrote anonymously, I essentially have no way of contacting you.....but: would you like to start contributing here?--Bddpaux (talk) 17:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

No thanks. The environment is too restrictive and doesn't adhere to the fundamental principles of a wiki. Formerly user 5.81.164.16, now at IP 31.52.166.114 (talk) 13:10, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Don't mistake principles of Wikipedia for principles of all wikis. --Pi zero (talk) 14:32, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
actually, the way they are saying, it is like they are applying enwp's style. dewp is very different in some cases (FR) or even eswp for not FU.
•–• 15:12, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I was going to leave this, but what is meant by 'FU'? Apologies if it's so obvious and I've missed it? 31.52.166.114 (talk) 17:32, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Pretty sure that'd be "fair use". --Pi zero (talk) 17:57, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Have you read this??

Wikinews:Requests for permissions top post by User:Leaderboard?? Interesting idea for light cleanup duties..... --Bddpaux (talk) 15:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Query

G'day Pi zero, I don't edit on this project, but am an admin on en Wikipedia. Today someone created User:Peacemaker67/common.js on WikiNews, apparently using my account, and I was notified via the interwiki alerts system. I didn't create the page myself. I've obviously changed my password, but this is a little weird to say the least. Any ideas what was/is going on? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:30, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: If you are an admin on enwp, and if 2FA seems to be a good idea, I would suggest you opt for that. I wonder if you received any on-wiki notification that your account was accessed from another device. In case if you happen to see what that script did, it ran a malicious JavaScript file from another host (see here) It is scary shit. Really scary thing, which affects many other projects too. I really urge you to change your password once again. Pinging someone who could be more helpful (@Bawolff:). (Also, it is "Wikinews", with the lower case 'n') I really hope there was no misuse of your account.
•–• 11:16, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

You might not be the only one. Leaderboard (talk) 14:21, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we are aware of the situation. A large number of users who were loading w:User:Cameltrader/Advisor.js script were compromised. Since you changed your password you should be fine now. BWolff (WMF) (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Peacemaker67 (talk) 00:21, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikinews:Request_an_interview

Has spam and personally-identifiable information. You may want to revdelete most of the revisions. Leaderboard (talk) 22:07, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Protection of talk page

Hi. Could you semi-protect my talk page due to ongoing vandalism? -- Tegel (talk) 12:42, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

@Tegel: From the page history, I'm guessing one year is a plausible time scale. --Pi zero (talk) 12:51, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that would be great. I will add a banner later referring to my Meta talk page. -- Tegel (talk) 12:56, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for interfering with the 'under review' ...

... I was reading and writing the review comment for the last several minutes but I had forgotten to mark the story as 'under review' first. I hope it has not resulted into an edit conflict or loss of work. --Gryllida (chat) 21:18, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

@Gryllida: No lost work. We should remember, when we finally do a dialog-based upgrade of the review tool, to have it check for edit conflicts, especially involving {{under review}}, when submitting a not-ready review. --Pi zero (talk) 21:23, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Three publications in four hours

A barnstar for you, for helping me keep my promises and commitments, and for the tireless effort!
•–• 00:02, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Adminship

Do you think I'd be a candidate for it here? I'd be primarily interested in 1.) editing archives to add categories and 2.) blocking vandals (as I just undid vandalism by an IP). I'll happily go thru the process but it seems like it's not worth it if you don't think I'd pass. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:41, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

While you have been on WMF wikis for so long, Koavf, you might want to go through the comments for another request. link. Though you know some of the policies and bits of how the project works, adminship would require a deeper level of understanding, which would be best achieved by regular participation of getting the output. As simple as it may seem, the more you write, the more you discover the hidden challenges, which would be helpful for getting the insight an admin needs.
•–• 06:00, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Koavf: Well, it's true we've lately turned down several RFPs for admin. It's important to know what not to do with the admin priv here. I'd hung back replying to your inquiry, myself, figuring to let the idea settle in my mind and see what further thoughts I might have about it. But, in fairness, if acagastya isn't in favor (apparently not), there's a good chance the community would prefer not to push through your RFP over those objections. --Pi zero (talk) 06:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Sure. That makes sense from both of you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:59, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Anonymous Blocks

Hia Pi zero! I have the Satanism interview comments page on my watch list because it had a high vandalism rate back in the day, so I received an email when it was edited. I saw you'd already reverted the change - I'm almost never the "first one on the scene" to revert vandalism because of my schedule - but hadn't issued a temp block to the anonymous user who blanked the page. (That's fine, I'm critiquing my own thought process here, not yours.) Before I noticed you'd already dealt with it, my planned course of action was to revert the changes and give a 1 week block to the anon user. Is that incorrect because this was a single minor action by this IP, rather than a pattern of more serious vandalism? — Gopher65_talk 22:31, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@Gopher65: Your choice, to block them for a week, would have been perfectly reasonable I think. Oddly, I don't recall actually considering whether to block; probably was distracted by vague possibilities for the editor's intentions other than vandalism. --Pi zero (talk) 22:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@Gopher65: Okay, they did it again; benign scenarios rendered implausible. One-week block. --Pi zero (talk) 01:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Yup, no question after this. — Gopher65_talk 04:02, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks...again

I just wanted to thank you for accepting me here and working with me through the mistakes I made. I plan to appeal my block on Wikipedia soon, but I think I want to stick around here too. I do not understand why some editors give this place a bad rap; once I learned about “freshness” writing here became much more enjoyable—almost like being back on the main site. Again, your help is appreciated and even convinced me to not give up on editing Wikipedia.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:43, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@TheGracefulSlick: Collaborating with you on Wikinews is a pleasure, and I hope you do continue to contribute here, as well as wishing you well on your appeal at Wikipedia. (Btw, your latest article is now published; you can take a look at my review comments. :-) --Pi zero (talk) 01:55, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Middle East and continents

Iran is in Asia, and is a part of the Middle East too. Egypt is in Africa, and is a part of Middle East too. Being in one geographical region does not disqualify it from being a part of the seven continents. It is in both, at the same time. And we have a history of keeping them both together. Even though it is less prominent for the articles about ME, or MENA, that has been there for far east ME country (Iran) or far west ME country like Egypt. Russia and Turkey were categorised in both. There is no actual need to not include continents as Israel and Palestine both are in Asia.

And then, how do you determine which geopolitical area to consider? Why not create Middle East and North Africa too? Why have India in Asia when South East Asia will suit well? Yes, they are rhetorical questions, which I avoid. But use your head. Or maybe refer to a different atlas: plot the intersection of Asia and Middle East and answer objectively if they belong to, or not belong to the continents or not. Spare me the subjective answer and opinions.
•–• 06:22, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Iran is in the continent of Asia. It isn't in our news region that we call "Asia". We don't have a category for the continent of Asia, only for the news region that we call "Asia". If you're asking why, historically, Wikinews divided things up the way it did, I've a distant memory it had to do with how the UN had partitioned the globe for organizational purposes. Once our choice is established and stable, which it has been for many years, where it originally came from doesn't even necessarily matter. (We have occasionally tweaked the boundaries between regions, and I'm not even sure we should have done so; maybe we would have been better off just sticking with the partition originally chosen, e.g. keeping all of Turkey in the Asia region.) --Pi zero (talk) 06:46, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

You lost me at "Iran is in the continent of Asia."
•–• 06:47, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Also, Turkish football team is under UEFA, their clubs play in the UEFA competitions, so even if the significant part of Turkey in terms of area is in Asia, I don't know if I should hold my head or laugh at your statement: "keeping all of Turkey in the Asia region".
•–• 06:50, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

The answer to both is that I was speaking of geography. Geographically, Turkey straddles the boundary between the continents of Asia and Europe; most of it is in the continent of Asia, but a bit is in the continent of Europe. Iirc, Turkey used to be placed simply in our Asia news region, and I was speculating that perhaps that should have been kept in its original simple state, rather than adjusting it. The adjustment was motivated by the geography. --Pi zero (talk) 07:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

In fact, btw, my memory on that particular detail turns out to be somewhat faulty: the Turkey category seems to have quite a messy history, with regard to which regions it was in. It appears that, at least in that particular case, when I started long-term projects to straighten out our categorization in the archives, I chose to pursue the categorization of Turkey articles as its regionalization then stood. --Pi zero (talk) 07:19, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Next cat in line

One day OZ Labor Party category needs to be created. The sooner, the better. "Labor Party" search gives 252 results. 39 mainspace articles are linked to Austalian Labor Party.
•–• 10:10, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Template

Just to make sure, the develop template is not meant to come up automatically? at 07:33, 19 December 2018 (UTC) by Qwerty number1 (talk)

@Qwerty number1: The {{develop}} tag, the {{date}} tag, and the {{haveyoursay}} tag should all be provided by the article-creation form. As WN:PILLARS says, "When you first create an article, there should be a template {{develop}} at the top. From then on, there will always be at least one template on the article saying where it is in our news production process." --Pi zero (talk) 13:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Odd, I dont think it came up?Qwerty number1 (talk) 16:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

@Qwerty number1: Please take note, when using an article creation form, of whether things like that get done properly, and let us know. We need to know if there's every a problem with that sort of thing. For example, if there are some circumstances under which the wiki platform's built-in preload facility doesn't work right, we need to know when that is, so we can figure out from there what to do about it. We do have an alternative technology for such things (dialog), which we've only migrated to in a few cases so far. (A delay in implementing that is, we don't just want to implement it in a few cases, we want to develop ways of making it easy to implement.) --Pi zero (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Yep! Did not automatically come up on my device when I created new page. Had to add in myself. Used home page box. Qwerty number1 (talk) 16:46, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

@Qwerty number1: A mobile device? --Pi zero (talk) 16:55, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, one might say so. It is actually a tablet, though they are rather similar.Qwerty number1 (talk) 17:07, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

@Qwerty number1: The single most likely factor to note, in this situation, is whether you're looking at the wiki platform's "mobile" interface, as opposed to its "desktop" interface. The desktop view should have, at the very bottom of each page, a bar of links with, over toward the right, one that says "mobile view"; the mobile view should have, at the very bottom of each page, two links "privacy" and "desktop". --Pi zero (talk) 17:24, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Ok, will use desktop when creating articles?Qwerty number1 (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Bsadowsky1 gets shot

Parody account, edits reflect that clearly. Globally blocked. But should it be a local block too?
•–• 10:13, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

No use for one. It's globally locked (not blocked), which means that the user cannot even log in. Leaderboard (talk) 11:02, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Each project has its own autonomy and previously, globally locked accounts and globally blocked IPs were blocked too. And therefore, I came to ask the one who had done that. And I am doing that
106.213.183.224 (talk) 13:28, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

I blocked both accounts, for good measure. Standard block settings for an account also have (limited-duration, one imagines) effect on the associated IP address(es), without requiring a CU. --Pi zero (talk) 14:57, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

I know, when I requested a block on enwp during exams, and I was tempted to edit, that block notice would pop up.
106.213.181.156 (talk) 15:06, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Shocked

You sent me a message that let me think that will my page will be deleted! What should I do? Ofreporter (talk) 08:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: As noted in the first pillar at WN:PILLARS, to create a page that will stay, you need to write a page, following our policies-and-guidelines, built around a suitable current event, submit it for review, and it has to pass review (which it has to do while still newsworthy). WN:WRITE is a tutorial on writing a first article. There is also an experimental "article wizard", alas non-interactive, at Wikinews:Article wizard. And eventually, any Wikinewsie should read the Wikinews:Style guide, which is designed to be readable: it sticks to core principles rather than getting (too) involved in details, so is much shorter than news style guides such as AP's or BBC's (or the English Wikipedia's MOS). --Pi zero (talk) 12:32, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Pi zero: So will my page be deleted? Ofreporter (talk) 01:35, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: Unless the event is recent enough, two mutually independent sources can be found, and the article can be rewritten quickly enough, and reviewed, it will (after a time) end up deleted.

What you want is to read up on Wikinews writing, choose a suitable current event, choose sources, write and submit an article; and be prepared to learn as much as possible from that article, one way or another. --Pi zero (talk) 01:54, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Please review

@Pi zero: Please review the article South Korea and Japan battered by cold wave. Thank you. Ofreporter ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 09:57, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

December 29 2018

@Pi zero: Thanks for the review, and the message you left me on my talk page was constructive. But still, as my account becomes autoconfirmed, I will start editing project pages, help pages and a few templates. Ofreporter ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 01:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: I'm not sure what you're saying. --Pi zero (talk) 02:41, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@Pi zero: It means I will edit project pages, help pages and templates instead of articles. Ofreporter ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 03:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Is that okay? Ofreporter ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 03:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: It would depend on what you mean to do to those pages. From my perspective, it seems as if most of what needs doing on the project falls into three areas: writing articles, reviewing articles, and building infrastructure. Of those three, the one a user can start in on before they've learned the principles of the project, in order to learn those principles, is writing. Everyone has to start with writing, to learn the principles and to demonstrate that one has learned them. --Pi zero (talk) 03:21, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

The Jewish Goddess Eve

Dear Pi, Thanks for responding. I need help beyond the norm. I really do have a story that will create global change once it becomes news, but I don’t know how to make that happen. I have been working on this for 22 years, since the first time I was at the UN in support of a Global Literacy Project designed to teach English to the world. I really am going to be the Jewish Goddess Eve and lead this world to peace. I learned about Wikinews yesterday. I know my story is specific, relevant, and fresh, so I know it’s newsworthy. Plus, I am very funny. If what I wrote was too much of an editorial, is there any other Wikimedia that might be interested? Or can you help me edit it to make it fit your guidelines? Me and MINDOLOGY and the UNITED STATES OF BEINGS and the NEW BABEL (a free movie) and SUDDENLY SANE (a free e-book) and the inventions I am donating to the nonprofit including the SOUND SLEEP SYSTEM and the HIDE & SLEEK and the V-CLEAN, and MINDOLOGY MEETING PLACES which will create millions of new jobs at $18 per hour… these are all elements of a story that must get out to the world. I know I am complicated and have a lot going on, but the world is educable. Please at least watch Part 1 of the NEW BABEL at WWW.MINDOLOGY.XYZ. I will not stop until I connect. I hope Wiki is my link! Mindy Dr. Mindy Scott President, MINDOLOGY and the UNITED STATES OF BEINGS [...] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mindology18 (talk • contribs) 01:07, 30 December 2018‎ (UTC)

@Mindology18: The material you want to disseminate is editorial/opinion; so, Wikinews is not the place for it. Only one sister comes to mind, in the wikimedia sisterhood, that might be suitable. You might wish to — gently — inquire at Wikiversity, which may be suitable. Don't pour lots of material on them to start with, I think; just make a short inquiry at the Wikiversity:Colloquium. The good folks there can tell you whether that project is suitable for you, and, if so, how to proceed. --Pi zero (talk) 01:31, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Making news

Pi, Thanks for the advice. I went to Wikiversity:Colloquium. I clicked on chat, and there is all this stuff about IRC that I am not familiar with. Is there another way to connect with someone there - gently? Mindy --Mindology18 (talk) 02:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Mindology18: Some projects have more active IRC channels than others; I have no experience with Wikiversity's IRC.

If I had something I was wondering about putting on Wikiversity, I would go to the colloquium page (the simple wiki markup for linking from here to there, btw, is [[v:Wikiversity:Colloquium]], which comes out as v:Wikiversity:Colloquium), and click on the "Add topic" tab at the top (that tab is a bit right of the center along the top). And just ask the question, attempting to explain in a few sentences (two or three, maybe?). --Pi zero (talk) 03:56, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Uniting the world with one voice

Pi, I did as you suggested. Pared down, do you think I can create an article in Wikinews?

I am the president of a nonprofit whose primary mission is a Global Literacy Project to teach everyone to speak English for free, and then to make all education in English free online for the world.

I have an amazing story that will blow the world's collective mind, once it is heard.

To tell it I am creating THE NEW BABEL. PART 1 - REGENESIS is a movie that is free for everybody at MINDOLOGY.XYZ.

______________________

I could really use some guidance. How do I get my own voice to be heard?

What about a press release for the NEW BABEL? It is brilliant, if I do say so myself, and not one person that I have asked has watched it and let me know what they thought.

Mindy --Mindology18 (talk) 05:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Mindology18: I gather the folks at Wikiversity feel your material doesn't belong there, either. That's not an unreasonable position for them to take. You are, honestly, looking to promote an agenda, whereas their goal is, as I understand it, to provide a platform for learning. Accepting their judgement, there probably isn't a place for what you're doing on the wikimedia sisterhood; you really are trying to promote a cause, after all.

There are lots of folks out there with ideas they'd like to promote for some selfless reason. But everyone knows that, and by the time one filters out the ones whose reasons really aren't selfless after all, and the ones whose cause one disagrees with, and the ones whose methods one disagrees with or believes cannot work, and the ones one just doesn't have time to get personally involved with, well, it's at least as much of a problem for people on the receiving end of idea-promotion as for those with an idea to promote. The only advice I can offer you, for whatever it might be worth, is to try to take all that into account, and devise a forthright, honest way to present your offering in a way likely to reach those you want to reach. Sorry the wikimedia sisterhood hasn't worked out for you. --Pi zero (talk) 20:33, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Policy

@Pi zero: On the page history of the page Template:Policy "(well, if the changes are small enough not to conflict with consensus, that's covered by the statement as well)", and my pending change was rejected. Why? Ofreporter ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 05:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Well, you were proposing to qualify the statement about requiring consensus, to suggest that only "major" edits would have to reflect consensus. But policy has to have community consensus, period. There is no "major" and "minor" in policy-page edits, ultimately, only edits that are okay and edits that aren't. --Pi zero (talk) 06:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Pi zero: That means only minor edits on policy pages need to override community consensus?! Ofreporter_{Send me a message!} 06:02, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Huh? It says what it means: ensure that your revision reflects consensus. --Pi zero (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Making news

Thanks for your continued attention. How about this?

The United States of Beings is a nonprofit corporation. Our primary mission is a Global Literacy Project which will teach everyone to speak English for free, and then make all education in English free online for the world.

The GOAL is Global Online Accessible Learning that you can learn about in a podcast.

Pi, when I first wrote to Wikinews I was trying to tell the story of how I have lost my right to free speech, but I realize that no one wants to listen to my complaints.

I strongly believe that I have the most important story that humanity will ever know. My job is to figure out how to be heard. --Mindology18 (talk) 20:55, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protecting User:Ofreporter

Can you semi-protect my user page? My sister tries to edit my user page using my IP, but hopefully I stopped her. Just to avoid this, can you semi-protect my user page? Ofreporter_{Send me a message!} 01:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

And may you semi protect this please? Ofreporter_{Send me a message!} 01:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: Since the template is specific to you, I've moved it into your userspace. Semi-protected both pages. --Pi zero (talk) 02:20, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Is it okay to create blog posts

Is it okay to create blog posts on Wikinews? I got used of Wikia's blog posts and want to make some blog posts here too. Can I do that? Ofreporter_{Send me a message!} 12:58, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: No. WN:NOT#isp. --Pi zero (talk) 13:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Never delete

Nearly all my pages were nominated for speedy deletion. What should I do? Ofreporter_{Send me a message!} 07:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: Well, each project in the wikimedia sisterhood has its own unique character, and the way to get to know any given project is to get experience contributing content to it. There's a bit of a special twist to learning Wikinews because a news article has to rapidly succeed altogether; so you have to get past a bit of an initial learning curve in order to learn to get content contributions to pass review. As I recall, you made a couple of tries at content writing, but then switched your attention to infrastructure work; but infrastructure work isn't really something for a newcomer to a project to undertake, because it's the veteran project members who know what to do with that. --Pi zero (talk) 13:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Man charged over motorway bridge collapse in Kent, England

I've long thought the UK should have a Road Accidents Investigation Branch to compliment the marine, aviation, and rail equivalents. Much of Europe does; the States has it as part of their central NTSB and I'm pretty sure Australia's got one too, and those are just off the top of my head. It occurs to me that, if Highways England did investigate this, one might be able to obtain the copy under Freedom of Information laws and use that for some OR. I'd be intrigued to try and find some foreign academics to take a look and comment on the results, techniques, and on if it demonstrates a need for the UK to join the rest of the world in this area (hint: it does). Sound like a decent investigative report? BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 15:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Sounds pretty plausible to me. --Pi zero (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I've asked for confirmation such a report exists, copies for it if it does, and some other related data on accidents in the area and of that nature. Incidentally, any chance you can look at the image credit on the Magnitigorsk piece and try to unbreak it for me? Idk what I did to it. Probably something obvious and simple. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 17:39, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Reviewer

Hello,Can I become a reviewer???(Mr.Mani Raj Paul (talk) 12:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC))

@Mr.Mani Raj Paul: Someday, perhaps. Not immediately. You need experience first. Which, of course, you can't get without somebody reviewing your articles. And I freely admit I haven't been doing well at that, just recently. But, it is a circular thing: the only way for new users to learn is through experience being reviewed, and we need a significant level of review to serve users so they can learn and advance toward where they could become reviewers themselves. Not everyone ever becomes a reviewer, either; some people just don't have the knack. So a lot of our work behind the scenes (where you can't see it) is to build tools to make it easier for people who are reviewers to get more review done with less effort. Of course, reviewers can't review their own work; but everything works much better when we've got more active reviewers operating at once.

I'll see if I can't get some solid review done today (even though I'm operating today with a sleep deficit; sigh). --Pi zero (talk) 14:16, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I understand your all points,yes you are right I'm new in wiki news.i need some more time.& I will do my best this year , Thanks (Mr.Mani Raj Paul (talk) 14:47, 4 January 2019 (UTC))

requested articles

hi i will be requesting articles. just a heads up. thnx. Snaggletoothkhan (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Snaggletoothkhan :)

Left you a question about one of the requests at your talk page.

Note: it's better to add separate news as separate requests (in separate sections). Gryllida (talk) 04:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Incoming

I figure it may be wise to put you on notice of Wikinews investigates disappearance of Indonesian cargo ship Namse Bangdzod. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:29, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

You’re biased

Bye Iamkasai (talk) 00:46, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Nah. I'm just clueful in recognizing bullshit. --Pi zero (talk) 00:59, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Two things

There are two things that you need to do. First, can I become a pending change reviewer? Second, all the articles that I created are mounted with the {{tasks}} tag. What can I do? Can I get expert advice from you? Ofreporter_{Send me a message!} 12:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: There's no such thing as a pending change reviewer here. There is just reviewer, which is a very big deal. Perhaps you should re-read about the basic workflow of the project; there's some about it at the first pillar of WN:PILLARS, and on the first page of Wikinews:Article wizard (where there's a picture).

When an article gets a {{tasks}} tag, it directs you to read the review comments on the discussion page; that's where you should find the main feedback from the review. --Pi zero (talk) 13:04, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ofreporter: You're keen, and that's good. But your attitude to copyright is somewhat cavalier, and a key part of this project is production of material which can be used freely by others. You're going to need to take more care with that going forward if you hope to one day help out with reviewing. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 19:41, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

January 14

I expect to be off doing things in the off-line world intermittently for the rest of the day (UTC). --Pi zero (talk) 17:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding alt text to Template:Topic cat

Can you please edit this? There should never be media without alt text. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:48, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Currently experiencing a power outage

The problem might be fixed quickly, or take a really long time. And until it gets fixed, I'd expect to have internet only maybe a couple of times a day, for an hour or two each time. --Pi zero (talk) 00:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Power restored. Total outage time, 11:44. --Pi zero (talk) 12:37, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

wikinews is not a valid project

Hello again. Very low priority message here. Have you recently gone to the bottom of a user contribution page and clicked "edit count"? I have found the result is "wikinews is not a valid project" which seems disconcerting. Your thoughts? Anyway, cheers and happy editing. --SVTCobra 01:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if it is an Xtools problem or a sign of things to come. --SVTCobra 01:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: Tool problem I think. Remarkably rude error message, though. I'm working on it. --Pi zero (talk) 02:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: Think I've got it fixed. --Pi zero (talk) 02:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes. In my sample of 3 it worked. --SVTCobra 02:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)--SVTCobra 02:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

You need to take a break

Pi zero, you know that blanking someone else's essay wholesale isn't proper conduct. You know that an essay titled "proposed conflict resolution technique" is not disruptive trolling. Please take a break and come back with a clear head. Not offended if you delete this post. No need to keep this in the archive. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:03, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm disappointed in you. That wasn't an "essay", it was project vandalism. I didn't delete it on sight as it frankly deserved, and I didn't blank it wholesale, either; I treated it with far more respect than it merited, explaining what I was doing, in parts. You could have asked for clarification on those parts; would I, at that point, have had the patience to explain in detail? Well, I'd like to think so, but neither of us will ever know. You responded with a patently trolling reversion, confirming what I'd already figured about the intent, so I deleted it as a disruptive action. One could argue between several speedy-deletion reasons. --Pi zero (talk) 03:56, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I think Pi zero would be able to provide explanations different from "you understand this so badly that I can't even" and "this is hell", if your questions -- and edits -- came at the rate of no more than one question per week and participation in no more than one article every week. Teaching a person like you, with the current availability of volunteers and documentation, at a quicker pace appears to be overwhelming and difficult.

I reckon you could argue "just do not review my drafts and do not answer my questions quickly". This is true. There is no damage incurred by discarding a story or several while we are slow. HOWEVER, when you also interact with other people, they may suffer the impact of you not doing it well.

For instance, a newcomer writes an article; you add the wonderful present tense as a hypothetical example to this article; I add past tense; you begin a conversation, and not responding to that results in the newcomer being faced with a difficult conversation and their draft becoming stale.

This is a problem. To address it I suggest that you do not edit others' articles, do not attract community attention, and work within your own limited bubble, for a while. Then we will be able to work out other things and your participation will become less of a hell to the project.

This is my interpretation as of today, anyway. I am not fully clear on it yet. Gryllida (talk) 05:45, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Pi zero, please do not delete essays out of my userspace. You are being disruptive. It is in direct violation of our deletion policies. The fact that you do not LIKE these essays does not make them trolling. Gryllida, I had not yet read your comment here when I wrote WN:SLOWDOWN, but its contents were quite similar. I am trying to solve the problems we have been having. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:12, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Your second and third sentences are false. --Pi zero (talk) 15:29, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Darkfrog24, the source of the problem here is in your behavior. We've devoted incredible amounts of effort to trying to help you, but you've convinced yourself that the problem isn't you, which is preventing us from reaching any way forward that doesn't force us to choose between you and Wikinews. --Pi zero (talk) 15:41, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I respect your right to have an opinion that differs from mine, but I find it very disheartening when you violate longstanding policy. You were very displeased when I used present tense in a way you felt violated one of our guidelines. Please follow our written policies with the same diligence and precision that you have asked of me. Please put the essay back and if you still think it's a problem file a deletion request through established procedures.

My "behavior" in this case is brainstorming a solution to our problems in my own userspace, as other Wikinewsies do. I'm sure you can see why "Everyone on Wikinews may write essays in their userspace except you, even if another admin asks you to. You and you alone are too [negative characteristic] to do that" is problematic. 1) It suggests that my thoughts are worthless. 2) It presupposes that I should believe my own thoughts and my own work to be worthless. 3) You seem to want me to learn how things work on Wikinews by watching what everyone else does, and that undermines that.

You say that I am wrong to believe that you make things up as you go and invent not-really-rules just for me. I would like to be wrong in that way. Surely you can see how that at least looks like that's what you're doing.

Please do not contest the undeletion request. No need for you to take any overt action at all. Just stand back and take a deep breath. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I'll indulge the first sentence: your disrespect for me is glaringly obvious, which the first bit disguises; the bit about opinions demonstrates obliviousness to the drastic asymmetry of Wikinews expertise involved; and the policy accusation is blatantly false. The second sentence repeats your persistent misrepresentation of the earlier incident as being simply about tense, which is effectively straight-up trolling, so I'll stop there.

Other people here may struggle with some aspects of Wikinews participation, but a notable critical difference is that they recognize they're having trouble with those things. For whatever complex of reasons, you're not exercising that self-check on your behavior, and the unchecked behavior is now spiraling out of control. You need to find a way to put a damper on your impulses, such that it allows you to function here. We can try to help, we've been trying very hard to help for a long time now, but it's impossible if you're not part of the solution. The only way to prevent the spiraling-out-of-control without your help is the way we've been trying very hard to find an alternative to. --Pi zero (talk) 17:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

It sounds like you feel disrespected because I don't act like you're better than I am. That isn't disrespect. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it is. Respect is defined as "an attitude of consideration or high regard"; "good opinion, honor, or admiration". It does mean "an attitude like you are better than I am". Gryllida (talk) 22:53, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

At the moment the discussions here seem like you are asking more and more questions and Pi zero is trying to respond, but the questions come at a faster rate than he is able to cope with.

As I said above, you may wish to reduce the number of questions which Pi zero is required to answer for you to one question per week or less. If you do this, then each of his responses may become more advanced, and more useful for you.

Undeletion of this content is important for you, but not urgent. Write it down in a todo and return to it later after Pi zero has started answering your other questions in full. Gryllida (talk) 18:53, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I read something very much like that recently. It was at User:Darkfrog24/Slowdown. It bothers me that no one calls it trolling when you say it, but it isn't any less true for it. So I'll take your advice and my own stay off this talk page for a bit. Pi zero, I can't make you take a break too but it's my opinion that you should.

Undeletion requests have a seven-day timeline. I didn't invent the rule; it's been there for years. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for promising to not query here.

I hope you also can un-{{flag}} your discussions and avoid editing articles created by others. This would relieve Pi zero from the need to participate in collaboration and discussions with you in these places.

In this case your contributions would be limited to your articles; any mismatch between the pace of your questions and the pace of Pi zero's answers would then have no impact on other contributors.

In my opinion such a goal would be highly desirable for a while, until and unless you are able to reach agreement about a few things within your articles first. Gryllida (talk) 20:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@Gryllida: We need a different approach, if we're going to resolve this in a way that enables Darkfrog24 to function smoothly on the project. At this point it's clear that two different approaches do not work.

• Answering Darkfrog24's questions isn't going to get us there. In particular, your proposal to limit it to one question per week won't work, because it's evidently based on the premise that slowing down the flow of questions would help. It wouldn't, and the reasons are widely visible in their remarks. Nothing said to them resolves anything major, and each thing said to them engenders a response containing multiple additional distortions (or misrepresentations or misapprehensions or whatever term one chooses for them). (Case in point: "It sounds like you feel disrespected because I don't act like you're better than I am." There are two, arguably three major distortions in that short statement.) As long as the problem is measured by the length of a queue, or stack, or even unsorted pile of stated misapprehensions waiting to be rectified, the problem will continue to get worse without bound.
• Trying to trace it all back to a root misapprehension isn't going to get us there either. I've actually done that already, and the irreducible starting point for it all isn't any of the fundamentals of the situation that Darkfrog24 is missing, it's that Darkfrog24 is missing that they're missing fundamentals of the situation. I don't see us convincing them of something they can't see that they've already convinced themselves isn't there. The only practical solution is to bypass those fundamentals entirely, finding a way that doesn't depend on them. It's imaginable that someday we (that's us and them) might migrate from some other thing and find our way to those fundamentals after all, but that would only be long after we'd found a way enabling their smooth functioning on the project for the interim.

Hence the need for a different approach.

I'm struck, btw, that you talk about limiting interaction to article writing, as if it goes without saying that article writing is a freely available option at this point. Here's the relevant excerpt from my review of the killer whale article: "I'm not seeing how a serious reviewer could choose to intensively immerse themselves in the sterile exercise of reviewing an article by a reporter who openly holds them in contempt." --Pi zero (talk) 21:45, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes. I agree Darkfrog24 would continue to sidetrack conversations. I am suggesting they do it somewhere where other contributors can opt out of reading it -- such as only within the articles they created, where involvement of any extra contributors is voluntary. Gryllida (talk) 22:42, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@Gryllida: I see, but that doesn't solve the problem of Darkfrog24's treatment of those they do interact with, and in particular the problem of their interactions with reviewers which leads to the problem with reviewing their articles I mentioned at the end of the preceding remark. --Pi zero (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

WN:DR

Hi. I just voted on the undeletions. I am sure there is a million miles and metric tons of drama behind the whole situation. However, deleting user subpages because they are working on a policy project which you don't like or think is completely unworkable is really the antithesis of the wiki way. It is not fair to call it trolling. Especially when it is someone who spends so much time writing articles for the project. (Many of which went unpublished, if I recall). I have seen the suggestions in the deleted pages. I would never vote for them to become policy or even guidelines. IMHO, they are completely useless because noncompliance is unenforceable without banning people for talking too much. Well, it is irrelevant. I hope you rescind the deletions and if they stay in user space in perpetuity so be it. I did not speak kindly about your action in my votes on WN:DR but my admiration for your work here is not diminished. Cheers, --SVTCobra 04:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC) P.S. There are more serious deletions we need to talk about when I find the time.

@SVTCobra: It sounds as if you've been led astray by believing what Darkfrog24 claims about the situation. Pardon me for saying so, Darkfrog24 is clueless about everything about the situation, from top to bottom. They've also convinced themselves —I wish I were exaggerating this— that they're smarter than anyone else here. And the discussion of the undeletion request has now been severely corrupted, probably hopelessly so; it started out developing into a remarkably clearly laid out presentation of who said and did what, in what order, and what their positions were and why, and then a succession of individually well-intentioned edits destroyed the record, probably irretrievably. Which makes it less surprising, but not less of a problem, that you might be misled about what's going on. --Pi zero (talk) 12:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Btw, their current impact on the project is negative. The massive project disruption they've created has almost entirely halted project output, destroying several articles by newcomers and several articles of their own. Their open contempt for reviewers may also compromise their ability to get anything published hereafter. --Pi zero (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I care not for the drama which I knew certainly precipitated this situation. And, no, DF has made no direct appeal to me to "lead me astray". The inquiry on my talk page about formal undeletion process was all. I did not read all the comments on WN:DR. As an Admin, I can see the content of the deleted page, which was not any personal attacks or anything which would otherwise merit deletion as trolling. I also don't see how writing an essay about a suggested policy or guidance in the user space is disruptive. The fact it could be considered silly or unworkable is really irrelevant. For example, if I wrote an essay about how I think Wikinews should begin to ignore copyright laws and wholesale copy video and photos from other news sources, I would expect to be left standing as long as it remained in the user space. Ag's claim that DF is using Wikinews as personal web storage (the only comment I read because it was left as a rebuttal to my vote) is preposterous. I have yet to read any updates on the WN:DR since my own last edit, but I fail to see why these 'essays' can't just be ignored. --SVTCobra 17:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: Although I fully sympathize with a desire not to get tangled in a dramatic mess, a judgement of trolling is inherently dependent on context, so you shouldn't be opining it wasn't trolling if you're entirely opting out of the context. The request sections are a mess, I agree, but I can't say I approve of injecting strong support for the creator of the deleted page without careful sorting out of what the heck is going on. If you want to stay out of it, not voting on the request would seem appropriate.

Actually, if you wrote an essay advocating wholesale ignoring copyright, from your description of it (though one would have to see the reality), I imagine I'd discuss it with you, and depending on what happened in that, I might discuss it with others and we'd probably nominate it for deletion; I doubt you'd create something that would call for SPEEDY, nor be disruptive about the way you did it. Except, of course, that, as usual for hypotheticals, the whole speculation is probably invalid because there would have to be some other factor at work, that I'm failing to take into account, or the hypothetical situation would never arise in the first place.

Actually, it seems to me the web-hosting angle is in the mix somewhere.

Those essays, though in userspace, aren't meant to be ignored; they're meant to be recommended to new users who don't know better than to believe the things they say about the project. Darkfrog24 even tried to create a project-space redirect to one of those pages. --Pi zero (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

If you were to write an essay about enwn ignoring copyright laws, is should be deleted regardless of which user space it belongs to. All the user spaces on this wiki are there for a specific reason to help the project (without doing anything wrong). Openly advocating for such piracy: that horrible idea is okay on your own local computer or server; but it serves no purpose on-wiki. Just because things are on your user space does not mean it is protected from deletion. That is literally how wiki can be abused for personal blog host. And if you were to do that (notice that I have been using "if", I am not assuming that you did), it would lead to weakening of the accumulated trust and reputation you have. With copyrights, and when you have admin rights; it would be a severe blow.
27.59.48.151 (talk) 19:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I do not want to re-open this topic, but I had to address how ignorant 27.59.48.151's reply was. By this logic advocating for the right of Thai people and anybody else to criticize the Monarchy of Thailand should be disallowed from Wiki pages including user-spaces. Advocating for the change of laws is not inherently against the goals of a wiki, including copyright law. You call it piracy, but if it were legal it would not be "horrible" as you call it. Breaking the law is NOT the same as wanting to change the law. And then to say asking to change wiki policy in an essay is akin to breaking the law is downright against the spirit of the wiki concept. --SVTCobra 02:27, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Speaking as the person doing the meaning, those essays in their current form are meant to be read by established, experienced Wikinewsies who happen to feel like providing constructive criticism. I clearly marked them as works in progress specifically so no new guys would mistake them for established policies. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:32, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I believe the grounds for deleting these essays has been that the author uses them as a means to request attention to matters which have not been resolved successfully elsewhere. This is fine, but the 'This is how Wikinews works' tone of this essays (as opposed to 'this is how I work, not necessarily the best') coupled with lack of clarity in some of them causes trouble. Coupled with 'please make this an official guideline' request and 'this is right, because whatever you are suggesting instead has not been documented' allegations at the talk page of some of these essays, does it not make them a classic definition of 'disproportionate attention consumption'?

They have been undeleted by Pi zero , but only temporarily for the author to make a personal copy for their reference. Gryllida (talk) 06:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

De-escalation

I ask you to remove or change your last post in the spider article talk page. It leaves me feeling pretty boxed-in. Whether or not that was your intention, I feel manipulated. Whether or not that was your intention, it feels like a threat.

Given what you've said, I feel that if I do change the tense of the article, it will be read that as a tacitly accepting a creepily servantlike, doglike role. I think that if I don't change the tense of the article, you'll claim I'm being disruptive even though I have promised not to revert or contest anyone else's changes.

More than that, I am concerned that this post might leave any third party feeling less welcome to adding their vision to the article, for fear of getting involved in drama. It reminds me of what SVT Cobra said about drama.

If this is not your intention, could you please find some other way to express yourself? Is there some way you can say what you mean without putting me so very much on the spot?

We are two people who are interpreting things differently. That is all. It can be a good thing on a collaborative project. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:29, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: You've misread pretty much everything about this situation; much of it you've got completely backward. I'll try to pare it down; though I don't think it's workable at this point to leave out any of the major points that directly bear on the current situation.

• You seem to recognize only a few modes of user-user interaction; especially, "let's vote" and "abject servitude". Neither of those is relevant to day-to-day news production. You need to learn how to interact with others on this project, apparently from scratch.
• You are trying to force us to accept you as superior to us and to the project as a whole. Evidently you aren't bothered by the "abject servitude" mode of interaction if you get to be the boss. I'm quite willing to believe you're unaware of doing this, but if so, that only makes it more of a problem.
• On a number of Wikinews principles (ranging widely in size), you have, honestly, demonstrated persistently bad judgement. But that doesn't have to be a show-stopper; it's possible for us to work tolerably well with someone who's not good at everything, if they're interacting the way they ought to be.
• This is becoming a crisis right now only because you are making it so. You've had more than two years on the project in which to learn how to interact, yet you apparently haven't started doing so yet. And then you decide you'd rather see your articles burn than behave the way everyone else here does.

I'm not "threatening" you. I'm saying it's not acceptable for you to expect us to clean up your deliberate mistakes. We can't work that way; it's untenable. --Pi zero (talk) 01:24, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Absolutely not. We are all colleagues and equals here. But neither do I wish to be forced by anyone else.

There is a middle ground between voting and abject submission. It looks like "You believe in that edit and I don't, so you go ahead and make it. I won't stop you." Even this is still submission.

Is there a way I can indicate "I don't want to make edit X myself because either 1) I'm not convinced it's a good edit or 2) I'm creeped out by recent events" that would not make you feel like you are the one being forced? Is there a way I can stay out of the servant-dog role without making you feel the way you say you feel? If your answer is "No version of 'no' would do," then I need to hear it so I know what I'm working with. This is a small project and individual contributor's feelings and comfort level can be addressed. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:59, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: I've spent pretty close to twelve hours today doing nothing but composing replies to your comments, which have repeatedly required hours of rewriting because the original comment was withdrawn or rewritten.

• No, people on Wikinews are not "all colleagues and equals". If you think that, you've managed to spend over two years on the project while still missing the whole fundamental social dynamics of the project (which I suspect you have, in fact, managed to do). People here are individuals, with unique complex patterns of strengths and weaknesses. The whole project is a device that, amongst other things, brings out and accumulates demonstrated evidence of those strengths and weaknesses, and applies it. People with plenty of project expertise and good judgment are sorted into service in central roles on the project where they help others along the same path. When you're dealing with a reviewer, figure they're expert, clueful allies.
• Describing that as "middle ground" is still reducing everything to doing what other people say. I'm not seeing any sign that you have a concept of cooperation. You're treating everything as a competition. That would certainly explain why you're not getting how reporter-reviewer interactions ought to work. I'm not sure how to help other than to explain situation-by-situation. Even that can't possibly work with someone who's decided they mustn't learn from anyone else because it would be "submissive". But, if you're interested, here's lesson one: In this particular situation, change the tense of the verb to past and, if you don't see why that's an improvement, you could... hm. It's remarkably difficult to explain without referencing cooperation. Well, trying to imagine, in such a situation I suppose I might say mildly to the reviewer —after making the edit— that I was wondering what their thoughts were on the advantages of doing it that way (except, of course, I can't quite imagine myself into that situation, because I already know the answer). Keeping in mind that their answer, if they get back to you with one, is not part of the article-publication task at all.
• As for the last question. How to handle the situation is covered in my preceding answer. Some other misconceptions built into the question: This is not about my feelings, but about your abuse of the project and the people on it. As a reviewer, I'm responsible for this stuff being done right; if you don't know that by now, you certainly should (long since); so by submitting without fixing you are either deliberately making my task harder, or, in any of several other possible ways, trying to undermine the project. It doesn't matter whether you can come up with an argument in favor of your position; a lot of how one conducts oneself in these situations is about avoiding things that carry any liability with them, and getting everything done quickly and without fuss.

--Pi zero (talk) 06:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

It sounds like you're saying "There is no version of 'no' that I consider acceptable."

For cooperation, Gryllida says s/he wants certain information in the article, I tell Gryllida exactly where to find it quickly... I go into incomplete articles and add to them—basically I make changes myself instead of just telling someone else to do it. That's cooperation without submission or competition.

You mention liability, so I offer you something else. This spider article is about creepiness in the recent past but my usual reason for not making a change is that I'm not convinced it's that good of an idea: Say Alice suggests a change to the article on a talk page. The drafter, Ron, thinks this change is a bad or neutral idea and says so. Alice insists. Ron makes the change. The article is rendered unpublishable or Wikinews has to issue a retraction. Whose fault is it, Alice's or Ron's? Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:28, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

2014 hostage in Sydney lindt cafe

Please restore the page 2014 hostage in Sydney Lindt cafe to work on it further or fix it because its about a notable event. 110.175.251.234

Wikinews is not Wikipedia. See Wikinews:Newsworthiness. --Pi zero (talk) 11:53, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@ Pi zero This event is in more than several news articles. 110.175.251.234

It happened in 2014. Is this correct, or did anything new happen recently (in 2019)? --Gryllida (talk) 04:42, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Re the bullshit

The discussion at User talk:Darkfrog24#Temporary_undeletes is bullshit. I see no reason why it has to be "imported" to meta. Darkfrog24 is capable of creating new pages on meta, there is no restriction on it. If they want to preserve history, they can go copy the article edit-by-edit and paste there. It is not that hard to do it manually. What they are saying is just delaying the process of hiding their essays from other people, and more the delay is, more they would feel they are winning. Meta's content is CC BY-SA 3.0, and hence, CC BY 2.5 content can be easily migrated there. I see no reason why that should be given that much time.
103.254.128.98 (talk) 18:34, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Discussion of the matter is calmer on meta. --Pi zero (talk) 18:49, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the diligent and ongoing reviewing efforts, Pi zero

Image by Kevincollins123

Hi Pi zero,

I wanted to share a thank you for reviewing New Zealand mosque murder suspect appears in court at Christchurch. To me it looks like a difficult story with many sources.

I am also thankful to you for reviewing other articles, and adequately prioritizing them so as that they do not become stale; and for participation in a number of recent discussions; and for anti-spam work. This is all required, and it would not be possible without you.

Regards, --Gryllida (talk) 19:19, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Status

Flu, for about a day and a half now. Afaik it's about a six-day thing. --Pi zero (talk) 15:16, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Well, feel better soon! I'm growing tired of our little amphibian friend. I just don't know. They've required a lot of attention and I'm unsure that they're worth it any longer.--Bddpaux (talk) 21:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I could almost think I was feeling "better", now (I'm well into a course of Tamiflu), except... by the time I get out of bed, come downstairs, set myself up on my laptop, and log in, I'm all tuckered out and ready to go back to bed. --Pi zero (talk) 22:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

(I wouldn't mind the amount of attention required, honestly, one sheep and all that, except they've apparently defined themselves to have nothing to learn from anyone else, making improvement impossible and the attention to no avail.) --Pi zero (talk) 23:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Please get better soon, Pi zero! :-)

I've found it pretty hard to focus on a monitor screen when unwell, particularly in the last three hours before bed.

--Gryllida (talk) 23:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Aristitleism

Hello, can this be deleted?--Aldnonymous (talk) 18:31, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Gone. Thx. --Pi zero (talk) 18:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Please review

Hi Pi zero

Please review:

Current review queue as of 22:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC):

• 18 April 2019: Donation drive raises over US$1 million to rebuild Louisiana churches after Notre Dame de Paris also catches fire
• 17 April 2019: Sudanese protesters protect defense ministry sit-in
• 17 April 2019: Officials find fire alarm sounded 23 minutes before the fire was reported in Notre Dame, Paris
• 7 April 2019: Students compete in world's second Neurosurgery Olympiad in Tyumen, Russia

For inspiration here is an apple pie and some fresh milk:

Happy holidays,

--Gryllida (talk) 22:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC)