User talk:Adambro/Archive 3

=2 January 2008=

My RfA
I dunno if you do RfA thanks here, or if it's just a Wikipedia thing. If not, I reckon the trend needs broken. Many thanks for participating in my RfA, which was successful. Unfortunatly, I can't use the excuse of testing my shiny new buttons to see what they do as I have them on Wikipedia ;). So, I guess that rules out any rogue-adminish behaivour ;-). Seriously, though, cheers, and see you around on-wiki! Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 15:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

=6 January 2008=

IRC
Do you mind going on IRC for a moment? Bawolff ☺☻ 12:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

=11 January 2008=

Thank You

 * I have been checking through my talk pages and have realized I never thanked you for welcoming me to Wikinews so I am thanking you for the welcome now. Sorry it is two months late. --User:Anonymous101 Talk 19:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

=17 January 2008=

Please see
These questions. Thanks --Mark Talk to me 15:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your questions, I have now responded. Adambro 17:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Image
Yes the email has been sent to permissons-commons or whatever it is, no reply or anything yet :-). I found th pic by searching on flickr, found a few pics there which were all un-suitable licenses however i came across a pic from i site i had been to before (airliners.net) so i went and had a looky there, contacted a few people and one of the people there offered me another pic, which is the one you see :-). thanks --Mark Talk to me 22:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Right, okay, I've emailed a user on Flickr but as yet no response. I've reviewed the permission and added the OTRS ticket to the image page. I'm not bothering replying via OTRS as I can of course notify you of this easy enough here. Regards. Adambro 22:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

=22 January 2008=

B'Crat vote and IRC
I'd note that the most dramatic "discussions" that have influenced your B'Crat vote have been with DragonFire1024. By being so prolific he's cut a lot of slack by many people in the community. Personally it has prompted me to take the time to explain what I see as wrong with his position without ever using the "Wrong" word. You are at a disadvantage because to some extent you're perceived as playing to Commons more stringent rules and not as "fast and loose" as some around here do. Commons has a bad rep because of deleting images we've had up for months, and was one of the influences that sent me on my archiving mission and setup of the guidelines. I'd rather have an article with a redlink and an opportunity to find out if we could restore the image locally under fair use. The alternative is you're left not knowing there was an image on the article in the first place.

Prior to you coming in IRC yesterday Markie said to me he wanted to nominate me. I hadn't actually considered nominating myself until you did so and thought it would be inappropriate to do so until your vote had run its course. Being told someone was in the process of writing up a nomination I said I'd accept. Can't say I've experience other than I'm effectively the only B'Crat on Wikinewsie.org ;) [Which may get a "private investigations" wiki sometime this week].

The Misou thing, well... I can't divulge what CU revealed but I preserved an article in my userspace that has publicly visible edits from the CoS. (See my userpage footer). The conclusion I could specify from that and the CU was "User likely working for, or activist member of, Church of Scientology". You'd have to be one or the other to have access to some of the IPs. In any case I was also the person who unblocked Misou. Xe chose not to pursue dispute resolution or ArbCom - likely because the account was already assumed CoS by many editors.

Not too sure we'll stay with the B'Crats being more timezone-distributed. I've applied for the CDA position with Wikia and that is in San Mateo, CA. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

=28 January 2008=

Accreditation
Why did you remove your own credentials? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 01:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

=1 February 2008=

WikiNews hotline
Dear Adam Brookes,

I'm a freelance writer based in New York and I'm doing a short article about WikiNews. I'd like to focus on is the way potential sources can request an interview either online or by calling the hotline. Do you anyone I could talk to about this (including yourself)? I'd love to hear some stories and get a sense of how it works and what advantages it has over traditional reporting.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Adam Rose

email: rose.adam at gmail......com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.239.234.146 (talk) 17:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

=12 February 2008=

For your contributions to Wikinews international report: "Anonymous" holds anti-Scientology protests worldwide


=20 February 2008=

Image:John Kerry via DVD.JPG
A current article, uploaded the image to Commons only to find out they deleted it. So, I got a little peeved. Took my frustration in a bad way. --TUFKAAP - (talk) 21:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

=24 February 2008=

Reasoning
You went through the trouble, of "fixing" a free image, dealing with the fair use rational, and then removed it from the article. Why? DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 00:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Forgive me. I misread everything and jumped to conclusions...I apologize and take full blame. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 00:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Clinton McCain.jpg
I want to wait until March 5, just in case Hil and McCain sweep the primaries. --TUFKAAP - (talk) 19:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, no problem, adding a source for each of the images would be helpful. Adambro - (talk) 19:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: London Marathon
Sounds like a plan - might need to take a bike, though! Can't see me running around for 26 miles ;) --84.66.214.105 21:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC) --Skenmy(t•c•w) 21:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Can't we get the tube? I guess if we did try to cover it we might have to split up for some of the time. Presumably we'd want to be at the finish in good time to get a decent position to photograph the professionals finishing but also be at the mass start. Anyway, a good while to make arrangements yet and of course my calendar might change but I certainly think it should be something we should try to cover for WN. Adambro - (talk) 21:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous Protests (March 15)
Hi, I noticed you attended the previous “anonymous” protests for Wikinews. Will you be able to cover the March 15 protests? Please be aware that preparation for the March 10 protest is being coordinated at this page. If you think you could report on the article for Wikinews add your name to the list. Anonymous101 Talk 18:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikinews Bulletin
 Anonymous101 (Talk) 21:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: CoS Protests
Excellent - might only get a bit damp then! --Skenmy(t•c•w) 08:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well done
Well done deleting all those unfree images. --Anonymous101 (talk &middot; contribs) 06:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Removing Unfree images
I would suggest that you comment out unfree images that have been deleted so it is clear that an image was previously there.--Anonymous101 (talk &middot; contribs) 20:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Why did you delete these images?
Hi Adambro. Why did you delete Image:RCMP scott.jpg and Image:Sealing ships trapped in ice.jpg? Your edit summary was, "remove unfree non commercial image which is an invalid licence per the foundation resolution," but these were fair-use, not replaceable, and licenced properly. --Jcart1534 - (talk) 00:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * These images were both listed as non-commercial, hence the deletion. I note their use is claimed as fair use and have undeleted them on this basis. This doesn't however mean that I agree that the fair use rationales are valid, merely that fair use is permitted by our EDP and so the deletion of these images doesn't come under the foundation resolution. Adambro - (talk) 22:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for restoring them! --Jcart1534 - (talk) 00:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Featured picture
I think we should probably consider moving to separate featured pictures from those displayed in the news in pictures displayed on the main page. Since featured pictures should really be subject to a community discussion before being defined as such and this process doesn't fit in with the current idea of displaying a relevant image of a recent news event. In the current situation there is little value to declaring proudly that an image is featured because it doesn't mean anything more than one editor has decided to put it in news in pictures on the main page.

We might even wish to consider scrapping the whole concept of a WN featured picture altogether if it doesn't seem workable. Adambro - (talk) 16:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * "Featured" is a misnomer, the "News in pictures" header is more appropriate. It's just meant to make the front page more graphical and to promote photojournalism: consider renaming the template if you want to avoid further confusion. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Please note that I just used the Wikinews template name and moved it to commons with wikinews-en before it. --Anonymous101 (talk &middot; contribs) 17:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Uga Man article
Thanks for dealing with that, it seemed pretty out of place, but I didn't really know what to do with it :-) Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 09:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Responding to your comment in the edit summary, I don't think this should be restored under any circumstances. He's not even eligible to hold the office so his campaign is a piece of nonsense that is more vanity and joke than anything credible. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Adambro's edit summary was just the default "content was..." summary. Zanimum wrote that :-) Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 10:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the confusion, it was indeed just the default deletion summary. Adambro - (talk) 11:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Why ?
The Template:Weather World C is not semi-protected ? Please semi protect it. The bot only have to edit it.220.135.4.212 13:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

✅ Adambro - (talk) 13:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Professionalism and IRC
I'd like to start by saying I'm sorry I was so blunt yesterday evening when you contacted me privately in IRC. However, I still think we have some irreconcilable differences over how free Free Speech in an IRC channel is. I find it useful and stress-relieving to treat it as a "virtual pub" where you can tell off-colour jokes and use sweeping generalisations that you don't really mean. The fact that so many people treat it in this way is why there is a "no public logging" policy as a default on freenode.

I can't remember who said it, but there is a saying, "Always take the job seriously, but never take yourself too seriously". People's ability to freely, bluntly - and potentially tactlessly - express their opinions on any topic allows you to build up a better picture of them as a person. This 'feature' of #wikinews allows you to better assess on-wiki contributions and know where people may have a bias. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

JustaHulk
Adambro, JustaHulk has made many useful contributions (eg.corrections).The most recent discussion was not started by him and he stayed reasonably calm considering it has been implied that he has been helping to organize murders. --Anonymous101 (talk &middot; contribs) (Note I have no link with the organization anonymous) 20:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Skenmy block
i'm afraid i don't agree with his blocking. i've commented reg. this on Skenmy's talk page (keeping disc. in one place). i'm inclined to unblock Skenmy but would like to hear your views first. –Doldrums(talk) 17:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * as per my earlier comments, i've unblocked Skenmy and have also asked for a review at WN:AAA. –Doldrums(talk) 18:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've noticed. Would it not be more appropriate to ask for the block to be reviewed before unblocking Skenmy? Adambro - (talk) 18:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Striking out AfD comments
I object to your striking out my !vote in the wikileaks vs scientology AfD. Just because I am a new user does not mean that I don't have a valid point. I raised the important and correct point that having lots of articles related to a topic is not a reason for deletion, as per WN:DG. This should have been considered in the close. Z00r - (talk) 19:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I haven't stuck any votes if I recall correctly although support the action since whilst I accept that anyone should be able to have their say, I don't feel it is appropriate for new users who can't be described as members of the community to be entitled to a vote. Anyway, I've just closed the DR in question as keep regardless of the votes by new users so I wouldn't worry yourself. Striking votes or not, it hasn't impacted on this deletion request. Adambro - (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, first, if Wikinews considers concensus in the same way Wikipedia does (there is no page on it here as far as I can tell), then one needs to "carefully consider the strength and quality of the arguments themselves (including any additional concerns that may have been raised along the way), the basis of objection of those who disagree, and in more complex situations, existing documentation in the project namespace should also be checked" rather than just counting numbers. Additionally, striking out the comments of new users is a surefire way to stop them from contributing in the future. You're basically saying, "You're not important, so I'm not even going to consider what you have to say" - rather contrary to the spirit of wiki collaboration... Anyways, it would be silly to press the matter any further, but in the future I recommend you be wary of biting newcomers. Z00r - (talk) 19:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * , I struck out your "vote" because it was your first edit here. I know that you are an established and knowledgeable editor at Wikipedia, but it appears that consensus in discussion at Water_cooler/policy is to strike out new users' "votes" in Deletion discussions, and keep their "comments", so I was deferring to consensus at Water_cooler/policy and striking that out, even if I may not myself agree that that should be done.  Also, it seems that this black and white distinction between "votes" and "comments" is quite different on Wikipedia than at Wikinews, FWIW.  "Voting" here at Wikinews, as separate from "Commenting", even voting without commenting, is not discouraged on Wikinews like it is discouraged on Wikipedia on deletion discussions and other sorts of discussions.  Cirt - (talk) 01:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Henleaze road in the hours after nearby arrest.JPG
Here is my reply.

I don't wish to sound harsh but I really don't think that this image is particularly useful. Could a photograph of the scene not have been taken? Adambro - (talk) 20:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It could but my camera run out of batteries before I got there and I ouldn't find any more. in addition the scene was blocked off.--A101 - (talk) 20:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Please note that a blocked the two sockpuppets of this user ( Albot124 and  Albot123). Feel free to unblock if you disagree

Wikimedia Radio
Hi Adam,

I'm sure you saw the proposal I'm putting together over on the Water Cooler based on a suggestion for "Wikinews Radio". As you're an admin on Commons can you help with inviting people from there involved with audio to take a look? The more achievable ideas we can get for content, the better.

I've just pitched the idea over on Wikisource as I understand they have a number of audio books; I'd rather not do the same on Commons as it is more frequently visited from people from Wikipedia. I'm not seeking to exclude them (Wikipedia), but to flesh things out more before they get involved and potentially overwhelm it with sheer numbers. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Delete
Delete http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Church_of_Scientology_donates_books_to_library_in_the_Philippines too (or is the cos mysteriously exempt from the rules)?


 * The article about the CoS doesn't seem to come under any of the speedy deletion criteria, hence why I nominated it for deletion and so the discussion at WN:DR continues. The article you recently created was clearly meant to make some kind of point and so was speedied. Adambro - (talk) 14:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)