User:Karen/Talk archive 20060419

Neutral Point of View versus Censorship of Information
Thank you for your comments. I am still wondering why the other sources don't mention this, but I'll leave it to someone else to deal with if you choose to put that info back into the article. best wishes, Neutralizer 12:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * With regard to this story, the other sources (India, Russia) are far from the event in Trinidad. Those sources likely had no access to the press release and would not be able to use it, unlike the local sources which are closer to the event and could be considered more reliable. Simply put, the fact that some sources didn't have that information doesn't imply that the information from the sources which did are providing incorrect information.  The information from a source can be used provided we make clear that the information is attributed to that source.  A source providing additional information is quite different from a source providing conflicting information.  That distinction is what makes the press release comments into additional information and possibly worthy of mention.  No source was clear about what caused the explosion, but that lack of information doesn't constitute a reason to remove the reporting of how many and who has been arrested in connection to it.  I personally don't see a need to report any suspects' nationality in this instance, but I do see the fact that after 3 similar events that this event was the first in which arrests were reported (not just questioned and released).  If later the five are released, then that could be a new story.  It could very well be that the five were arrested so it would appear that progress is being made in the investigation - but that remains to be seen. That possibility is still no reason to exclude the fact that they were arrested in the first place. As far as I can tell, only one person thought the arrests should not have been mentioned, and I did not see any reasoning behind that action. Karen 09:15, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ok; you convinced me. Neutralizer 14:00, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: Thanks for discussing the Issue II
Thank you for thanking me! You're quite right that we should perhaps be more fleixible -- working on that. I wrote the orignal version of the article you were referring to and all the information I included (including the references to the arrested individuals) was properly sourced. I understand your frustration. Generally, when I write the first draft of an article, I simply write it and leave it -- else I become upset with what others are doing to my work (which is the wrong attitude on my part). Best wishes. Please let me know if I can help you in any other way. --Chiacomo (talk) 18:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Kansas article (To split a story, or not to split...)
May I suggest you compare the current article version with this one? - Amgine / talk 05:09, 2 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for mentioning the story's split, Amgine. Either way, I think it would work well - I just think the work you did on the article made it reasonable enough (even with the FSM included) to be a good (NPOV) story.  Since I didn't contribute to any of the story, don't give much weight to my opinion, other than I think it's not as controversial as others think it to be -- ie. if the consensus of all contributers agree, run the story as-is.  However, that's not the course of action that was taken; again since I didn't contribute, even if I objected to splitting, don't give it much weight.  However, seems to work.  It's typical of newspapers to run mulitple stories on different aspects of one topic, especally in a situation like this.  Karen 05:35, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I suggested another article earlier on. I'm not opposed to the split, although I think a bit of mention of the FSM makes a good background for the copyright article as well. Actually, if there is a consensus of contributors to run an article which is in violation of the community standards, as an admin I have to oppose it even when I happen to agree with the editors. If that consensus of contributors changes the community standards (through established practice,) then the article can fly, but not before. - Amgine / talk 05:50, 2 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The arguement of NPOV hinges on just how much the intelligent design topic is a part of the copywrite permission story, and if the FSM section is overly-promoted or not worth placing into the story. It's not so much of a matter of changing established practices as it is agreeing on what those practices are.  As far as I could tell, the article was NPOV after your edits. But to avoid the whole arguement (NPOV issues seem to appear any time anyone's offended - and my take on that is to include more alternate opinions, not remove them.), splitting the story was a good call and an established standard practice. I'm not convinced the story violated any standard practice just before the split - but we both seem to agree that it could have run without the split had it not been for others' complaining.  It seems to me that by complaining to remove material, the story's POV is shifted away from being neutral.  As you can tell from other discussions here, I believe readers should see more points of view instead of only the ones that don't offend. Karen 07:59, 2 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The two stories seem to compliment each other and perhaps everyone is happy this way. But what if readers (or editors, since any reader can edit) take offence to something in the second article?  For instance, I could be offended by the suggestion that The Flying Spaghetti Monster has gender bias because it is porayed as having the male attributes of two meat balls, or simply that I embrace FSM far more seriously than its creators do and believe the story belittles FSMism.  If for some odd reason I was in the majority, does that suddenly make the second story also not NPOV?  If everyone's to be made happy, they'll have to either have their viewpoint included in this second story or have a nother split story that everyone thinks is NPOV.  The point is that the NPOV standard can't be defined well enough or interpreted well enough for us to make the decision to run the story after all the revisions without splitting it - so it had to be done for the betterment of all, not because of community standards - but to make the community happy.  This tends toward majority mob rule when repeated enough times. Karen 08:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Help on new article ?
Regarding the new article:

US state of Kansas in battle over "Intelligent Design" in education

The identical action has now been taken by MrMiscellanious, that is, he marked it as NPOV and sent it back to development. It still contains both POVs, so I don't know what he is complaining about. Could you please take a look and offer your opinion ? StuRat 15:36, 2 November 2005 (UTC)


 * In its current form, US state of Kansas in battle over "Intelligent Design" in education seems to have satisified the original objections of MrMiscellanious. FSM seems to get just slightly more of the story than it deserves, but the story does cover all sides of this news event - the battle.  The story introduces the issue well and leads directly into a discussion (as seen in its discussion page), and seems to be written by a neutral perspective.  Reporting POV's is different from stating a POV and then perhaps stating a counter-claim and denying its validity without quoting facts or sources.  MrMiscellanious does seem over-sensative about the expression of some POV's, even when done properly in a story.  As long as someone responds to his actions with discussion questions and slight modifications, if he doesn't respond, then the issue should be counted resolved.  I'm sorry I did not respond sooner; I haven't been around for the last week to be of any help. Because of the teamwork, the two stories (in their final forms) seem to have perspective without having a single POV.  Karen 20:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Legally Blond ("My name is Blond, James Blond.")
I now realize I'm not legally blonde... thx :) Edbrown05 21:37, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * sorry, i amuse myself sometimes.... Edbrown05 21:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey - Thanks for the note here! I don't really like to change back something unless there's a reason it was that way to start. Sorry I reverted your correction (which would have been correct if the victim was male). I do hate to 'undo' the thoughtfulness of others' contributions ( Pennsylvania couple murdered; daughter abducted ) but in this case: Blonde vs. Blond - The word “blonde” is the word for a female with yellow hair, and “blond” is the word for a male with the same color hair. Karen 21:43, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


 * In common US usage, blond and blonde are used interchangably. Also, either is appropriate in adjectival use for either gender, which this was. - Amgine 21:50, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

If so, then leave it as it was originally and stop reverting reversions. Or how about if there's two choices, follow the one that's more formally correct? See above. Karen 21:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, did I revert a revert? if so, I'll back it out. - Amgine 21:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I did. Sorry I did that; if I'd seen the original change I'd have done the same, with the same summary. - Amgine 22:02, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

AP source says "blond", but story's creator said "blonde". Edbrown05 says "blond", then I reverted to "blonde", then Amgine reverted to "blond", then I reverted to "blonde". Uh... What next? Hehehe! I'm only defending my reversion because of the silly formal rule and because the story's creator changed AP's wording. Otherwise, I don't think I'd be that picky. Sorry for all the confusion, but thanks for all the fun! Karen 22:06, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I didn't know it was all that! Now I'm really laughing! -Edbrown05 22:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

As a foot note, my hair is naturally brown - a “brunette”. If you were male with brown hair, would that make you a “brunet”? English lets us be truly silly. Karen 22:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm writing up a version of style guides; I'll have to make sure to add blond/blonde but I'm not adding brunet/brunette unless I have citations! - Amgine 22:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

time warp
No matter how much I try, it still takes just a second. -Edbrown05 07:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I hate when that happends - Earth slowing down and all&hellip; At least we were able to reach a consensus about the problem. Karen 21:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

City names in headlines
In Talk:Oklahoma City suburbs on fire you stated that "Unique city names need not be further defined by country within the headline." and i agree with. however there is another similar dispute in this article. i can't revert due to the fact that i've already done so 3 times. i was hoping you would change it back to Rape suspects in Ciudad Juárez arrested which is the proper name. Ciudad Juárez was named after Benito Juárez, one of Mexico's most important political figures in their history. Absolutely a unique name and a major city. thanks. --MateoP 00:16, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Karen. I am on the other side of the debate, and feel that many readers won't know that Ciudad Juárez is in Mexico unless so identified in the title.  I also feel that mentioning that the victim was not only raped, but raped and murdered, is important enough for inclusion in the title.  That is why I changed the title to what I believe to be the reasonable Rape and murder suspects in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico arrested.  If you agree, no change is needed.  I would appreciate your comments in either case, however. StuRat 00:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, it's never wrong to add extra information to a headline. However, I still belive that if the city's name is unique (even if it's a small city), the country name isn't required. In the case of Ciudad Juárez, I know it's in Mexico and I know no other city has that name - so I don't believe the country name is needed in the headline. But I adamantly believe that some background about the event's location (including country) should be within the first sentence of the story.

Arguing that the determination should be based on city population or some assumption of reader knowledge is absurd to me. I think a better criteria needs to be used. In the case of this article, I think the headline is fine either way. I'd definately add the country name if the city name in the headline wasn't unique. Karen 17:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Adminship!
Would you accept a nomination for adminship on en.Wikinews? -  Amgine | talk en.WN 05:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would. Although I'm happy just to make corrections when I see mistakes, I'd also be willing to learn how to make admin changes in good judgement. I don't entirely envy the position - seems like a lot of work for  admins sometimes. Karen 01:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 *  I will nominate you immediately. -  Amgine | talk en.WN 03:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You are nominated! You'll need to accept the nomination on the RFA page as well... and thanks! -  Amgine | talk en.WN 03:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now an admin. Please review our policies before using your new powers, if you have not already done so. If you have any questions please feel free to ask me or any other admin. --Cspurrier 20:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, Congratulations Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 20:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Stealth contributor makes Admin! Pictures at 11!  Heh, congratulations. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Opium production - an all-time high
Sorry for being so verbose at the article talk page but you are the first reader of the 6 stories about this who seemed to be interested. Opium appears to have been used as a geopolitical tool for effecting US geopolitical foreign policy for a long time now. If you wish to get answers to the "unanswered questions" you mention, it is not that difficult, however I have been met with opposition to providing information useful in getting answers in our articles because of our natural pro-USA slant on news. You may want to start by reading the related articles and all the sources where you will find support for my opinion that the coalition is not trying to stop opium production;e.g. "Kazai said. 'Where international money and creation of forces for destruction of poppies was concerned, it was ineffective and delayed and half-hearted.'" But in terms of answering the "why" the topic broadens out into an alternative view of the modus operandi of the people who have led american government foreign policy most of the time since the early 1800s; and whose level of control is at a high point right now. If you want more info on "opium as a foreign policy tool" after reading the related articles, please let me know. Neutralizer 12:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I went on holiday at some point and missed this until recently. Personally, I'm not as interested in USA's reasons for most anything, but I do recall ads from the US going on about how buying drugs supports terrorism - then they stopped playing entirely and seem to have faded out of existance since the US overthrew Iraq's government some three years ago.  I was interested mostly in how to research and source reliable information for the story that started this discussion.  I'll have to read your suggested articles and go back and re-read the story to see if it's changed since I left on my latest grand adventure.  I'm mostly back now - still have to unpack, but at least the computer's warm again.  Karen 14:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * (regarding the title of this section) Hah! irid:t 03:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikinews Audio Speex louder
I was just reading your talk page the other day. Weird. Pleased you see you're not a sock puppet, either. :)
 * I've been here long enough that I can start making fun of people. I really didn't follow who called who a sock puppet, but thought it'd be funny to add it to my user page - considering how slick Amgine would have to be if I were his sock puppet by nominating me for adminship after a few long discussions and small edit wars with him (carefully orchestrated for maximum effect, of course :). I didn't quite understand the exchange about the babel boxes, either. We'd all better just learn Esperanto and forget the bother of having our own culture and language.  Yes, I realize multi-lingual persons are a great resource in this setting; I'm just not well versed in anything but English.  Karen 20:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I realize the level was pretty low; I've been sick, and my apartment is noisy. If I had increased the level, there would have been a lot of obvious background stuff going on. However, I think I figured out a good place to do my recordings. I'm looking forward to that; I'll be able to crank the level pretty good at that point.
 * What's funny is that at first I didn't know it was your recording, then I'm cheering for you to show these guys how it's done just before I realize it was your recording that I was criticizing! When I must increase the gain to hear, then get blasted when I play a video game or song, it makes me cranky. I consider -40 dB to be radio silence, you see.  Karen 20:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Speex would be awesome. If only it wouldn't segfault on my Linux sound machine. Oh well. I guess I'll get a plugin for dBPowerAMP. irid:t 09:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * My biggest reason for wanting Speex is that it's easier to download or stream from dialup. Besides that convenience, intellectually I want the format (Codec) to fit the purpose - and for Speex, that's human speech. What can we do? Produce both formats for awhile (hosting Speex files elsewhere) until Wikimedia Foundation will allow Wikinews to host Speex files?  Karen 20:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

That is exactly what my user page says. :) I've been thinking about this for a while and I've wanted to host the Speex files on my site, as a demonstration of how bandwidth efficient the files are. In any case. Speex can use the Ogg container format for storage, so we could "sneak" them onto commons before people really notice. The only downside being that people with players like Winamp would just get garbage on the other end if they didn't know it wasn't a Vorbis file... irid:t 20:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Doesn't Winamp natively play all Oog? I suspect I should do more homework instead of speculating. How about you create both types and post the Speex format somewhere where you can monitor the usage (how many downloads) and see how it goes?  I'll certainly try it on as many computers, operating systems, and applications as I can - for instance, Media Player should be able to play Speex if the correct codec is installed.  If a modern version of Winamp will play Speex (I'm assuming it will) without having to download any additional codec or plug-in, then that's one less obsticle for users to overcome.  Karen 21:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Winamp natively supports Ogg Vorbis. The thing about Vorbis is that it is a stream format contained within the Ogg Container format. You can theoretically put anything into an Ogg file if you format the data correctly. You can even multiplex different streams of data (with different types) in an Ogg container. That's what Ogg was originally meant to do. Theora, a video codec, fits inside of Ogg as well, typically multiplexed with a Vorbis audio stream. Anyway. Winamp doesn't really understand that the extension ".ogg" can mean something other than Vorbis. So it tries to decode the file using the Vorbis decoder, and you end up with a bunch of noise instead of speech. Or, it just doesn't decode the file at all, and you get a "0 minutes 0 seconds" file. (ahem) Anyway. I'm sure there's a Speex codec for Winamp, but most people won't have it. And anyway, I don't know if Winamp will ever support having two different decoders for the same extension. A player like xine or VLC would, though... irid:t 21:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * So far I have been able to record and encode Speex, and play it back with Windows Media Player and XMMS. I couldn't get anything on Mac OS X to play it, but there may be a way to use XMMS to do it. I wasn't able to use Winamp to play back my Speex files at all. At this point, I can listen to them via stream and direct from a file.  Karen 13:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This is news to me that Windows Media player will play back Speex files. Does it do that without the DirectPlay filters? My concern is that most people won't have the ability to play these files out of the box. Sorry for my delay; I've been out of town. irid:t 22:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It's with the DirectPlay filter. I downloaded it from here. Karen 23:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Tag removal - is it illegal?
Hi Karen. Is it cool to remove the tag from Talk:ETA_declares_permanent_cease-fire? --elliot_k 13:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Oui! Er, Sí! The award-winning Cspurrier should have removed the tag when he removed the Reuters translation. Anyone can and should remove the tag/flag whenever the issue is resolved. I'm sorry I was unable to do the work myself. Next time I might give it a try using the online translator and someone more adept can fix the details.


 * I removed the tag just now (16:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC) Alright, I overslept) and put some comments and questions in the talk section. :Thank you for working on that article, elliot_k - you could have removed the flag, but it was kind of you to leave me this note. Karen


 * Cool. Thanks. Some good CATEGORIES. I really think Wikinews need a better decent central point for categories. --elliot_k 17:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I left the flag on because the issue should still attract community attention. We should have a translated copy of the statement. I was unable to find any Spanish speakers with time to translate it online when I removed the statement. I left the flag on with the hope some Spanish speaker would find it and translate it. --Cspurrier 15:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * If the article went from being flagged for copyright to being flagged for need of a translator, moving the flag from the talk section mentioning copyright to the section that mentioned the translator need would have let any reader of the talk pages know that the initial reason the article was flagged wasn't the current problem. One of my earliest gripes was that it seemed the higher up in rank one was at Wikinews, the less likely one was to make use of the discussion page after making major edits. But then I'm a bit picky on that, so am probably too critical about it. I typically write more in the discussion section about what I'm doing in the article than I've written in the article, itself.


 * I also flagged Talk:BBC_announce_TV_highlights_for_Christmas_2005 because it's still being shown as "in development". If anyone knows how to resolve that one, please leave a comment in its talk section so I can learn how to do stuff better around here. Karen 22:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You are 100% right we shoud use the talk pages more :). I was working on the print edition when I found it, and half a sleep at the same time, so I was a bit lazy about it.--Cspurrier 22:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Show me and tell me
What admins can do and why, as determined from the actions of admins who didn't mention what to do or what they have done in the talk page.
 * Marking and unmarking an article for community attention
 * Marking an article abandoned
 * Welcoming a user with

None of the things on your list require the person to be an admin, --Cspurrier 21:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * is documented at m:Help:Template it can be escaped by surrounding it with   tags.
 * the abandoned tag is explained at Template_messages/Disputes
 * the marking and unmarking of an article for community attention has no real documentation or policy. It was created after someone proposed it ot on the water cooler. People are expected to use common sense when determining what to mark, and for how long it is to be left marked.

At some point an admin will learn these things - I expect that other admins will eventually disclose these tools to newer admins, even if it doesn't take an admin to use them once they are discovered. A brief explaination of how and why in the talk section of an article will go along way toward showing others how and when to use what.
 * Which section of Help:Contents contains help on HTML where the   tags can be discovered? An HTML section should be added to the help page since escaping isn't limited in use to  tags.
 * Where can a list of tags be found? They are not listed completely at Help:Variable -  is not listed there.
 * If an article can be marked as abandoned without a dispute, why would the abandoned tag only be listed on the dispute page? (Or if it's listed elsewhere, where? Same as  tags, aren't limited to use where they are documented.)
 * Since you bring up how long a mark should stay, I'm wondering if I have used common sense when I've determined what to mark and how long to mark it. (If I have not, which instances have I failed?)
 * Common sense may be expected when determining what to mark, but where are the list of marks/tags/flags so we know what we can mark?
 * Generally: If it's in the documentation, is it buried? Is it easier to document by example when making major edits or status changes, or instead  write complete documentaion in the help section?
 * Specifically: If a particular type of resource is available, is there a complete listing of that type which can be found with reasonable inspection of the help page? What's in our toolboxes?
 * With regard to being told by an admin that categories must be placed into each article, can a complete list of the categories be placed in the help section or in a section regarding the creation of articles?

Karen 21:34, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Categories
Yes this is something I am interested willing to helping to organise. Wikinews_talk:Categories_and_topic_pages...

Thanks!
Hi Karen... just wanted to let you know that your edits fixing up grammar are very welcome. A misspelled word or a poorly worded sentence make our articles look very unprofessional, and your contribution greatly enhances the quality. Thanks! - Borofkin 23:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

More than 256 story edits so far! I find mistakes on other news sites when I read their stories. Wikinews just happends to not only have the most mistakes, but allows me to edit them as well. Thanks for your note here, Borofkin. Karen 01:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Help correcting sub-cats
Hi Karen,

You fixed the cats on an article I submitted, Candace Parker double dunks, makes basketball history. I just made a bit of a mess in my attempt to streamline by creating sub-cats. Would you be willing to take a look and help me fix this. Evidently I'm not clear on how to create the hierarchical relationship. Here's the bottom cat/page: Category:Women's basketball/NCAA Women's Basketball/Tennessee Lady Vols basketball THANKS Deeb 21:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks like your sub-cats are nicely created - you either learned how and did it or someone else helped you. I see how it's done now. I'll know next time someone asks! Nice job on the story, by the way! Karen 00:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)