User talk:Mbm93

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 23:35, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

UoW student?
Hi. Are you a UoW student? If so, please put a template on your user page, like this:

and you can fill in the missing field too, of course. :-) --Pi zero (talk) 04:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Australian mass killer considered for release
I have reviewed Australian mass killer considered for release and left comments at Talk:Australian mass killer considered for release. I highly suggest thinking about the inverted pyramid when rewriting and make sure you have the lead nailed down to answer all key facts, including the killer's name. --LauraHale (talk) 07:43, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Pakistani President convinces Prime Minister to put all state executions on hold
I have reviewed Pakistani President convinces Prime Minister to put all state executions on hold and left feedback at Talk:Pakistani President convinces Prime Minister to put all state executions on hold. The article has problems with source verification. Not all the facts match with the article text. It is difficult to figure out how to remove these facts without losing most of the major text. Please check to make sure all the facts match the text. --LauraHale (talk) 08:22, 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) 11:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)