User talk:Leak watcher

Libby article
Hi Leak, Mind moving the links to "sources"? -- Zanimum 19:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi there, Thank you for the great work on Libby learned from Rove about Novak article early. One little thing though. In future, could you please upload images that you made yourself to wikimedia . This way all of Wikimedia can use them. Thanks. Also if you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Bawolff ☺☻[[image:smile.png]] 03:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it is unfair of me to characterize Doldrums as having a bias here against news stories that are less than 'Breaking news'. Magazine-like articles such as the Libby story are also published here too.

During the press conference when the Libby indictment was announced, Fitzgerald use a baseball metaphor to liken the Libby actions to that of, "throwing sand in the face of an umpire." How does this article, and the redacted names of Rove and Armitage, relate to the 5-count Libby indictment? That's the speculative problem with the article. 'News' does not equal 'Speculation'. Libby knowing something doesn't mean he broke the law with that knowledge. -Edbrown05 03:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

He allegedly lied to the FBI on October 10, 2003 by saying he had learned the information from reporters, namely Tim Russert, Ronald Kessler, Andrea Mitchell, and perhaps Matthew Cooper and Judith Miller, based on court documents I've seen. Also, I didn't ever say Libby ever broke the law, nor did I deny. I noted that he contends the Valerie Wilson's name was declassified when he disseminated it. With regard to whether he intentionally lied to the grand jury, I also noted Libby's arguements in court that he simply had a faulty memory because it was farther from his mind than other things at the time. Leak watcher 03:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Right, so the jury will decide. -Edbrown05 06:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Why isn't some variation from two paragraph's above, if this argument is so strong, the lead to the story. -Edbrown05 06:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I now think every single bit of information is important, from the first sentence to the last, and that the article should be at a name other than "Libby learned from Rove about Novak article early" to reflect this. The information in the first paragraph is essential to the rest of the information, though, and makes the best starting point and lead-in, in my opinion. What do you suggest the new article title should be? What do you think of "Valerie Plame scandal: New details uncovered"? Can I publish the article an hour from now? Leak watcher 06:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * What? And bore the rest of your world with you speculation? Libby broke the law? Yer kidding fer sure! -Edbrown05 07:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I say nowhere in the article whether or not Libby broke the law. I only identify two, or maybe three, sentences of the article as speculation, which I will now remove. I thank Wikinews for holding me to high standards. Leak watcher 07:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I gota roll off, thinking when a court decision comes in on this case, (he will be innocent) i mean what a fuck-toid. later and at u -Edbrown05 07:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; 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 ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ), 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!
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Google earth images
Unfortunately the images from google earth you uploaded are not fair use on Wikinews, only on WIkipedia. You will have to contact the copyright holders of the images to ask for permission to use them. Also images uploaded to Wikinews are usually only uploaded if the intent is to use them in articles, otherwise they should be uploaded to commons. Jason Safoutin 19:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)