User talk:Shii

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

Welcome[edit]

Ashibaka, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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! --Mrmiscellanious 00:34, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Ashibaka 00:40, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikinews:Story preparation/Bloggers investigate social networking websites[edit]

I will try to review this article this weekend, but I'll warn you that my time is very heavily drawn on already. In remembering the article in brief: it appeared to me to be an investigative report into two websites which may have privacy policy issues. Iirc, I had some concerns regarding the editorial tone of the article, and wondered if you had read the WN:NPOV, but don't have time to get too deep into editing the article atm. - Amgine | talk en.WN 23:59, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't get to this. I trust you and the community to get it right. - Amgine | talk en.WN 02:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom elections[edit]

Sorry I had to remove your vote on Wikinews ArbCom elections, 200 edits are needed to vote on the Wikinews Arbcom elections. you only have 89 edits Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 06:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The Goings-on Selection[edit]

Welcome to the first edition of this fortnightly Community Newsletter! If you have comments, please voice them. If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, you can unsubscribe. If you have news for the next edition, please submit it here.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 00:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikinews community[edit]

Wikipedia news - Wikimedia news


edit this

Collaboration requests[edit]

Other[edit]


Flagged discussions[edit]

Open polls[edit]

Please vote in open polls! Add {{poll}} to a page to have it listed here.

Vandalism[edit]

If you continue to make unilateral policy-contradicting changes to project pages, I will give you a block after all. --Pi zero (talk) 02:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me, what policy am I contradicting? I'm merely clarifying the pages so people don't make the same mistake that you yourself said I made. Shii (talk) 03:29, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Nice, you blocked me instead of answering my question. Do you possess the courage to give an explanation for this block? Is it even possible to do so without contradicting the comments you left at Talk:Yoshihiko Noda appointed Prime Minister of Japan? Shii (talk) 03:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, I was in the process of writing a detailed, positive note on the matter, but of course to do justice to such a note requires some time, and when I'd completed it I got an edit conflict from your further accusatory complaint here.
I'm disappointed that the explanations I've written there for your benefit have failed to get their meaning across to you.
You disregarded my warning not to take such action unilaterally, and I acted as I said I would, even to duration. 24-hour block. Keep in mind that a block is not punitive; rather, it is preventative. The optimistic theory with short blocks such as this is that the recipient has time to unwind and contemplate the problematic behavior that led to the block, and come back behaving better. (The pessimistic theory... well, admins tend to see even the best users when they're at their worse. Optimism is a better way to avoid burnout.)
I'm not going to bother transcluding the standard {{block}} template here, as it'd only clutter up the page; besides, 24 hours is trivial. --Pi zero (talk) 04:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

My two-cents[edit]

I don't want to say (or do) anything under-handed to you or even toward you (and trying to would be silly as everything we do here is out in the open anyway)...so please take these comments (as they are intended) with a sense of humility and teachability......

  • I think you're intelligent and I think you write well. But, from what little bit I've seen, I'm not sure you're ready to be a reviewer. Always remember this about Wikinews...."It's quality not quantity that matters." That's very important.
  • This is a PROJECT....like painting a big neighborhood mural or cleaning up an old abandoned lot or tearing down a widow's old garage. As such, a sense of giving to the betterment of the project is what matters most. If you're looking for accolades and big giant HOO-RAHS, maybe you should take ukulele lessons or something, 'cause you'll only get a leeeee-eeeetle bit of that stuff here.
  • Remember: give a little here and there.....it adds up. You have to slowwwwwwly gain respect here. It will be given, but it must be earned. I'm not yet a reviewer and I'm merely HOPING to become a credentialled reporter here sometime this year.....so, the point is: focus on giving....not on taking.

At this point, I will probably OPPOSE your request to become a reviewer......give it a couple of months, contribute here and there....and we'll see later on down the road. Good luck!Bddpaux (talk) 02:38, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I've been here for 5 years, how much longer do I need to contribute and "prove myself"? Shii (talk) 03:29, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Concerning your "demands" and a request for an apology[edit]

Shii, you asked on the talk page of the article you wrote, about which policy mentioned not using foreign language sources - you will find the relevant policy here Wikinews:Cite_sources - please see the last section of the page. The issue is simple - when you use a foreign language source on an article, it drastically limits the number of reviewers who can check the article. Since the reviewer must be able to physically read the sources, (we can't rely on Google Translations), foreign language sources are only to be used where they are absolutely one hundred percent essential, like there is probably only one English source to go on.

Articles where all the sources are in a foreign language are exceptionally hard for us to deal with, and I say this as someone who speaks 7 languages. Please understand this was not bias in any way, this was the application of a long existing policy standard which we have to apply across the board, regardless of who wrote what. I'm not trying to belittle you in any way, you have the right to be annoyed that your article was not published, but attempting to blackmail us by saying you won't do anything if we give you reviewer status is not on. Accept that your story wasn't published, you've now been told why and shown where the issue is, move on. BarkingFish (talk) 22:59, 7 September 2011 (UTC)