User talk:Cocoaguy/Archive 3

New York firebomb suspect arraigned
In my (interrupted... well, these things happen) review, I found a surprising number of inaccuracies that seemed to have somehow crept in to the story &mdash; things that seemed like they might have been meant as paraphrases, but were really going beyond what was given by the sources. There was also some shortfall of caution for the distinction between saying he was alleged to have done things (which is fine) and saying he did do things (which is potentially libelous). If you haven't already, you may find it useful to look over the.

Thanks for reviewing my second post-publication edit, btw. --Pi zero (talk) 03:36, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

archiving
I see you archived a bunch of articles. Appreciated. For whatever it's worth, when we're really slow (which has been a lot, lately, though not 100% of the time), my unofficial practice is to never archive down to fewer than ten articles on the main page. My reasoning is that when things get that low, the articles on the main page are serving as examples, and we ought to keep a good variety of examples visible.

Note that the world isn't going to end because we're down to eight right now instead of ten. But I do recommend the ten figure as a good place to put the pivot between archiving by date and archiving by list-length. Ten also means we never have a problem populating all five lead templates; sometimes an OR article will linger as a lead long enough that a shorter-than-ten list would be pushing it, but ten has always been safe, I believe. (It'd be really counterproductive, I figure, to have few than five leads, since they serve as examples of our wares even more than the DPL does.) --Pi zero (talk) 04:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

31 die in Mexico jail violence
Great to see you reviewing! I do note, it's always better to look for some copyedit to make before publishing; the earlier the better, since it makes the review process visible. (The behind-the-scenes nature of much of review leaves room to imagine far less work than is actually involved.) (WN:Tips on reviewing articles :-). --Pi zero (talk) 19:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Indiana Template
Thank you for adding the template so quickly! Crtew (talk) 21:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

US government expands definition of rape to include men
You may have already noticed I gave it a not ready review (you were on break when we changed that from fail, I guess), but I've decided I like the habit of leaving helpful notes to authors on their talk pages after a review. It's an idea I picked up a few months back from Brian McNeil (who was using it in reviews of UoW student articles).

See my review comments, and (though pretty slim in this case). --Pi zero (talk) 21:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I've commented on the talk page of this, I'm interested in making it more detailed/comprehensive.


 * Let me know if you think that's worthwhile. --Brian McNeil / talk 22:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sadly, nobody responded in a timely manner - so the only addition is about rape vs smoking. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

US Coast Guard rescues Iranian ship
Published. :-) . --Pi zero (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Oops
I'd made the art theft Lead 5 (replacing the oldest non-main lead), so when you made it Lead 3, it was redundantly two out of the five leads at once. (I've fixed it.) --Pi zero (talk) 06:20, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Video
You've downloaded something from YouTube &mdash;in my experience, most news-related stuff there is pirated from news sites&mdash; and didn't provide the URL you'd gotten it from. It's pretty meaningless to say the copyright status is currently being determined if wherewithal isn't provided to determine it.

Keep in mind that Wikinews fair use does not allow stuff from other news sites, and as I say, most news material I've observed on YouTube is pirated from news sites. --Pi zero (talk) 20:40, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Man killed in police shooting in Brooklyn, New York
A heads-up. There were a lot of serious mistakes in this. Saying the guy with the gun was coming into the house. Saying the guy without a gun lived there. Saying the police hadn't said whether the gun was registered. (Those I remember off the top of my head; the detailed edit history shows a few other things.) It seems unlikely that much of that (and possible that none of it) would be due, in this case, to changing sources. After fixing so much I had to think very carefully to decide whether I was too involved to review. Please be much more careful. --Pi zero (talk) 12:10, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Woman gives birth on New Jersey PATH train
Great article, fascinating stuff, especially their possible chosen name, heh. -- Cirt (talk) 23:43, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Woman gives birth on New Jersey PATH train

Unarmed man killed by narcotics officer in The Bronx
Found not ready. Review comments; listed everything I could think of. --Pi zero (talk) 03:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Susan G. Komen Foundation reneges on Planned Parenthood funding cuts
Published. Review comments,. --Pi zero (talk) 15:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

The Raleigh Telegram
You might recognise some of this article.

If not, refresh your memory with these two articles:
 * Mitt Romney wins 2012 Nevada caucuses
 * Mitt Romney wins 2012 Florida primary

Yes, your contributions have ended up in print in The Raleigh Telegram.

I'm sending them a polite email thanking them for picking up our content, and asking they link to the source online; plus, we're Wikinews (not WikiNews). --Brian McNeil / talk 17:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Leads
I do generally turn from publishing straight to deciding how (and of course whether) to make the published article a lead. I take some time to weigh alternatives; it's often a good deal more than just order of publication, and of course sometimes there's rearrangement of multiple leads involved. But I do think of lead-making as part of publication (realizing some reviewers with initials BRS prefer not to touch it). --Pi zero (talk) 21:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for reviewing and other assistance
Hi. Next week is the start of the IPC Alpine Skiing World Championships and two Wikinewies will be attending to cover the para-alpine skiing ahead of the 2014 Winter Paralympics. This is part of an effort outlined at IPC Alpine Ski World Championships. Immediately following this event, there will be a Meetup in Barcelona where Wikinews, the Paralympics and efforts to similar sport coverage will be discussed. At the moment, there are only two active reviewers on a daily basis. Demonstrating an ability to get reviews for these types of events done quickly is important for Wikinews credibility and gaining access to these types of events. I would really appreciate it if you could sign up on the IPC World Championship page to review, promote articles published during this period, assist in translating these articles into another language or attend the meetup in Barcelona. Thanks. --LauraHale (talk) 09:28, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikinews Writing contest 2013 is here. :) Please sign up to participate?
We've created the Writing contest 2013, which will start on April 1 and end on June 1. It is modeled on the successful 2010 contest. Unlike the previous version, points are available for people who conduct reviews. (With a University of Wollongong class currently contributing articles, extra assistance is appreciated at this time.) It presents a great incentive for you to renew your reviewing chops, contribute some original reporting not being done by the main stream media, and write some synthesis articles on topics that could use more attention. People should be around to review to prevent a backlog if you just want to write, and several reviewers have access to scoop to make it easier to review any original reporting you do. If you are interested in signing up, please do so on Writing contest 2013/entrants. There is at least one prize on offer for the winner along with the opportunity to earn some barn stars as a way of thanking you for your participation. :D --LauraHale (talk) 10:35, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

How can it be.......?
....that this is your first time to get one of these???

Whatever the case, you certainly have earned it!! --Bddpaux (talk) 16:31, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Being bothered by User:Pi zero
He is bothering me with rubbish each edit. He is never contributing. He deletes articles comments sites here, although the article is existing. Articles under development are clean up articles. I might not write about RB Leipzig. My started articles have interest and he says that other archived articles are which from amateur clubs, university clubs or something else. He wants to rename my name here and is not rename me. My articles are written after the style such as about other proven football match reports. He is psychic unable to name reasons. Please remove him from the board! He neither productive nor socially competent or educated, for a globally representative on public free sites. --Nikebrand (talk) 21:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Privileges
'''Note! Your privileges on English Wikinews have been reduced.'''
 * Under the Privilege expiry policy (enacted October 13, 2012) the rights held by your user account have been reduced due to inactivity, or lack of privilege use.


 * Point 4 of the Privilege expiry policy provides for fast-tracking reacquisition of privileges. We all understand that real-life commitments can severely curtail the level of commitment you can give to Wikinews; the privilege reduction is in no way intended as a reflection on your past work, or to imply you are unwelcome. The aim in curtailing privileges is to address security risks, and concern that a long period of inactivity means you may not be up-to-date with current policy and practices.


 * Per this version of WN:RfP, you may review the public announcement of this change. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC)