User talk:ElizabethLittle

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 01:50, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Flavour Flav convicton
Hi. The article was reviewed as not-ready for publication. See review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 02:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Flavour Flav
Hi. You failed to address almost every point raised in the previous reviews. Until you do, the article has zero chance of getting published. Before you resubmit again, please create a checklist on the talk page, check off each point as you address them so YOU know you taken the step towards getting published and WE know you have done that. Only after YOU check off on the talk that you addressed all feedback should you resubmit. --LauraHale (talk) 05:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Please stop.
Please do not submit again until you do a checklist on the talk page where you review all the comments and indicate you worked towards addressing them. Failing to address them and resubmitting is considered disruptive. If you want to know if you fixed one thing, ask on the talk page instead of resubmitting. --LauraHale (talk) 05:58, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Your article
I renamed your article to Iraq bombings kill 25 people. According to the style guide, headlines use the sentence case style of capitalization. — Mike moral  ♪♫  02:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution
Hello. Your article "Iraq bombings kill 25 people" has been deemed abandoned, but is still viewable at User:ElizabethLittle/Iraq bombings kill 25 people. Thank you for your contribution. Remember that most articles from new contributors are not published and so there is no need to be discouraged. Just read Writing an article and follow the guidelines there and your next article will likely be published. Thanks again for your interest.--William S. Saturn (talk) 01:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Cranial implants developed from 3D images
Hi. I have left feedback for Cranial implants developed from 3D images at Talk:Cranial implants developed from 3D images. Please read this feedback, review the style guide and published articles, and fix everything mentioned plus other issues you identify after reading style guide and examples. With the huge amount of work because of the review queue length, unless everything is done and it looks published ready, getting a second review quickly will now likely happen and newsworthiness will come into play. --LauraHale (talk) 06:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Looking at articles from a reviewer perspective...


When I was doing reviews this morning, I screencast a number of them with the hope student contributors and other Wikinews reporters could see what reviewers are looking at and better understand some of what we are looking at. Hopefully you may find these helpful for understanding what we look for, bearing in mind that every reviewer does look at things slightly differently and no two reviews are the same.--LauraHale (talk) 12:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Welsh Paralympian Chris Hallam dies
I have reviewed Welsh Paralympian Chris Hallam dies and left feedback at Talk:Welsh Paralympian Chris Hallam dies. The facts around his death are not readily available, so the ones that are there and important, like where he was living when he died, need to be emphasized more. Words like pioneer need to be avoided unless there are facts that clearly support it, and the text does not. (He won 16 Paralympic medals and that is a huge accomplishment, yet the article does not reference that.) The article feels vague, and not clear. It almost feels like in order to avoid plagiarism, key and important adjectives towards understanding concepts are left out... which in effect makes it difficult to understand. --LauraHale (talk) 07:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

NSA says thousands of privacy violations were 'human error'
I have reviewed NSA says thousands of privacy violations were 'human error' and left comments at Talk:NSA says thousands of privacy violations were 'human error'. Please address these concerns before resubmitting. --LauraHale (talk) 08:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Screencasts of some of today's reviews
The six videos are screencasts of reviews done today. As a whole, all the articles have improved tremendously from when they students first submitted. Now, they have infoboxes. They usually have a relevant picture, most of the time giving credit to the photographer. They more often than not have categories. The external links are not in the body. The sources are more consistently and better formatted. These little changes make a huge difference for motivation when reviewing because they show reviewers students are listening to feedback and attempting to get things published according to community standards.

That said, the current issues get to the more difficult spot of issues with making sure inverted pyramid style reporting is done, plagiarism and very close paragraphing need to be better avoided, facts need to match facts conveyed in sources, and relative dating needs to be better done. These are on one level the much harder part of doing good reporting on Wikinews. The screencasts of reviews included from the batch I reviewed this morning are more so you can see that what we are (I am) thinking when we are (I am) reviewing. This may not be educational in terms of teaching you how to report, but it might give you insight into what we are looking for. Hopefully that can be a little bit helpful in terms of understanding what we as a community on Wikinews are looking for in publishable works. --LauraHale (talk) 11:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Screencasts of some of today's reviews
The six videos are screencasts of reviews done today. As a whole, all the articles have improved tremendously from when they students first submitted. Now, they have infoboxes. They usually have a relevant picture, most of the time giving credit to the photographer. They more often than not have categories. The external links are not in the body. The sources are more consistently and better formatted. These little changes make a huge difference for motivation when reviewing because they show reviewers students are listening to feedback and attempting to get things published according to community standards.

That said, the current issues get to the more difficult spot of issues with making sure inverted pyramid style reporting is done, plagiarism and very close paragraphing need to be better avoided, facts need to match facts conveyed in sources, and relative dating needs to be better done. These are on one level the much harder part of doing good reporting on Wikinews. The screencasts of reviews included from the batch I reviewed this morning are more so you can see that what we are (I am) thinking when we are (I am) reviewing. This may not be educational in terms of teaching you how to report, but it might give you insight into what we are looking for. Hopefully that can be a little bit helpful in terms of understanding what we as a community on Wikinews are looking for in publishable works. --LauraHale (talk) 11:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

New lead under investigation in six-year-old Madeleine McCann case
Hi. Rather than not ready New lead under investigation in six-year-old Madeleine McCann case, I have moved it back to the draft stage to give reporters time to address the comments on the talk page as these will need to be handled before the article is ready for publication anyway. I would also suggest looking at the article's history to see what changes other community members have made. Looking at the individual edits should give you a better idea of what sort of things reviewers are looking for. --LauraHale (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Sydney Opera House celebrates its 40th birthday
Sydney Opera House celebrates its 40th birthday — Mike moral  ♪♫  01:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)