User talk:NGerda/Archive 4

This is User talk:NGerda Archive 4, performed at 16:35 UTC July 18, 2005.

Hi!
Thanks, I'm glad you're still bombing around with unrestrained enthusiasm! Saw the lead, maybe it would be a good jumping off point to write something about the justice process going on in Rwanda at the moment, hm, will have to see how much time I have after commenting on the proposed layout... :) ClareWhite 1 July 2005 09:28 (UTC)
 * Sounds excellent! NGerda July 1, 2005 09:29 (UTC)
 * Um, hang on. Isn't there a better picture that could be used than 'Darfur refugees'? OK, I'll go find one... ClareWhite 1 July 2005 09:40 (UTC)
 * We had a great pic a while ago of skulls from the genocide, and I couldn't find it. -- NGerda July 1, 2005 09:42 (UTC)
 * Yeh, was just gonna say that might be the one to use again. It's been used on several previous stories if you can copy the reference? Rwandan genocide investigations to be completed by end of July ClareWhite 1 July 2005 09:50 (UTC)
 * Done! Thanks a bunch.  Tell me if you need any help. NGerda July 1, 2005 09:52 (UTC)
 * Aaah! Would you stick this link in Rwandan_genocide_investigations_to_be_completed_by_end_of_July somewhere around the words tha refer to it. Can't get the bloody hang of it and I've got to go back to work... thanks! ClareWhite 1 July 2005 10:16 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. It's 3:20 a.m. here in California. -- NGerda July 1, 2005 10:17 (UTC)

Excuse the interuption, Great job buddie on the WWDC!! I agree with with CGorman, award deserved
 * Thanks Mr. Anonymous IP! NGerda July 1, 2005 10:34 (UTC)

Apologies on that one
I did not realize they were published. BTW: the rollback merely does an edit on the version before the first one by you - it's not a "vandal tool" per se. - Amgine/talk 1 July 2005 08:57 (UTC)
 * It was created to revert vandalism, not legitimately-based user edits. NGerda July 1, 2005 08:58 (UTC)
 * NGerda is completely correct on that. Ask anyone on WP or any developer - it should only ever be used for rv'ing vandalism Dan100 (Talk) 1 July 2005 09:11 (UTC)

Sorry to re-post this NGerda, but I just asked on the Wikipedia mailing list about the intention of the Rollback. Angela replied, and also pointed me here, where Brion (a MediaWiki developer) explains the intentions of Rollback.

So as you can see, Amgine is clearly abusing his admin privileges here. Dan100 (Talk) 1 July 2005 13:15 (UTC)


 * Great muckraking Dan! NGerda July 1, 2005 21:16 (UTC)

I've tried a news report for today (7/1/2005)
I just did a 3-minute news cast for today. Seems to have worked quite well. Thank you for the suggestions.
 * - Paul Robinson (Rfc1394 1 July 2005 22:09 (UTC))
 * No prob, man. I'll check it out right now!  NGerda July 1, 2005 22:10 (UTC)
 * And don't forget to add it to Template:FrontPageMediaMenu. NGerda July 1, 2005 22:12 (UTC)
 * - I have re-uploaded the file with the audio amplified by -7 db in an attempt to reduce the volume level. I shall try to remember if I do any more reports to cut the volume down a bit.
 * - Paul Robinson (Rfc1394 1 July 2005 22:26 (UTC))
 * Sounds good, eh? NGerda July 1, 2005 22:28 (UTC)

Audio Wikinews Scripts
You may have seen this on the water cooler, but if not, please see: Wikinews talk:Audio Wikinews --Chiacomo (talk) 2 July 2005 05:24 (UTC)

Category:LGBT
Do you think we can come up with a bit more descriptive name than Category:LGBT, such as Category:Gay and lesbian? --
 * Hello - when adding a category to a talk page for discussion - be sure to add a colon after the first set of brackets like: Category:LGBT so it will print as "Category:LGBT" instead of just listing the talk page in the category. As for a more descriptive name - you probably know that LGBT news includes bisexuals, the transgendered and intersex folk - who are neither gay nor lesbian clinically or in self identification. We would have to have a category that read something like: Category:Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex - which is way too long. From much discussion in the other Wikimedia Foundation projects, the wiki category acronym "LGBT" has become the usual project consensus as a workable, less-controversial compromise. -- Davodd | Talk 5 July 2005 00:50 (UTC)


 * Thanks for creating an LGBT section on Wikinews. I am very interested in creating more stories for this category as well as others. As for the title, I have seen and given the issue much thought and agree "LGBT" is best - and it is the most popular according to search numbers on Google and Yahoo!. I don't believe we need to keep adding to the current title and feel it is inclusive of all communities. A discussion can be found on Wikipedia w:Talk:LGBT - Tdempsey 5 July 2005 06:16 (UTC)

Please don't assume I agree with you
In fact, I did not agree with your reverts, nor do I agree with putting the picture on that page- I just fixed the links so the article would link correctly. In fact, I agree with Dan regarding the splitting of the articles, but at the time, I was more worried about making sure the lead article linked correctly. Don't put words in my mouth. Lyellin 5 July 2005 21:15 (UTC)

Wikinoticias in need of translations
Hi! I read you are a proficient (and available!) english/spanish translator. The main collaborators in es.wikinews are currently on holiday. As a result, we have gone down from several articles a day to several days without an article. This situation should be over next monday. Might I ask you to lend us an extra hand until then by translating some Original Reports from english to spanish? Thanks! -- 80.28.47.78 5 July 2005 21:24 (UTC) (noticias.blog @ es.wikinews)
 * I would like to, however I am taking a wiki break for now. I will be willing to help in a week, though!  -- NGerda July 5, 2005 21:26 (UTC)

24 hours block for three-revert-rule violation on Template:Lead article
Hi,

we do not accept reverting the same article more than three times within a period of 24 hours. Since you have done so, under current policy, I have no choice but to block you from editing for 24 hours. Please, in the future, instead of reverting repeatedly, discuss a change on the talk page. Thanks,--Eloquence 6 July 2005 03:19 (UTC)
 * While it's obvious NGerda did in fact violate the 3RR, policy does not appear to require an automatic 24 hour block. If one checks the relevant Wikipedia policy, one will read, "The admins are under no obligation to block a user for breaking the 3RR, for instance if they see that the problem has been resolved in another manner." It would appear this issue has been resolved, though there may be other issues to consider. --Chiacomo (talk) 6 July 2005 04:26 (UTC)


 * Two users insisted that NGerda be blocked, so that option does appear to be out of the question.--Eloquence 6 July 2005 04:37 (UTC)

your vacation
I tried to rally some support for you NGerda, but it appears to me from the feedback I've gotten that you really have made some people upset. You of course are in the position to know best what it was that caused all the trouble.

You are not alone in being labeled a trouble maker. Bear that in mind that others have been trounced for pushing their own agendas. All here at Wikinews could probably be blamed for opinions and actions that attempt to trump others. When to back off may be the key thing you need to ponder. -Edbrown05 7 July 2005 04:35 (UTC)


 * First I'd like to thank you, Ed, for reinforcing this. Ed, you were the very first user I met at Wikinews, and you generously showed me how to edit the lead articles.  I seem to catch on to things quicker than I expect, and I have realized my mistakes at Wikinews.  My mistake is that I assume that people will rally around good changes, when in fact they are far more comfortable with a complete voting process and consent.  I am terribly sorry to all I offended by bypassing the system of consensus.  You have my word that I have learned from this and I will do my best to wait for community consensus before implementing major changes.  I want it to be clear, however, that I never made any changes to intentionally hurt Wikinews, as some of you may presume.


 * One final thing I'd like to note is that I've discovered that tensions can run high very quickly in IRC, and perhaps it is not the best platform to discuss heated issues. And I would appreciate it if users would stop telling me that I'm "not much of a use to Wikinews or "all [I] do is break the rules", especially'' when the very people accusing me of these things don't put anywhere near the work and dedication into Wikinews.  That is all, and happy editing and policy-revising to all!  -- NGerda July 7, 2005 05:12 (UTC)

User:Blibber
Currently, he has ONE edit. Now, even though there may be an specific type of vandal, that IP/Username does not need to be blocked for that long! It won't solve anything. Better to do a targeted block, whichsolves the issue, and allow things to return to normal. But again, that username has one edit. I know in past history, it's better to do a block which solves the problem, without extending it. Lyellin 7 July 2005 05:40 (UTC)
 * He is a known return vandal. Policy states that one-month blocking is permitted for return vandals.  -- NGerda July 7, 2005 05:41 (UTC)
 * Perhaps then you can point me to that policy, the only thing I see is "For vandalism and breaches of the three revert rule, admins should block for 24 hours. In other cases, admins should, in the first instances, consider the use of shorter blocks for first offenses, and only 24 hours or long if truly necessary." Which says nothing of that. Beyond that point, that username has been used ONCE. Now, that same type of vandal, and perhaps even that same vandal may have been here before. But if that person uses an IP, will we block for a month? 2 weeks? a week? The reason no is, because that that IP may be used my someone else. In this case, with a username, we only need a one day block- that will solve the problem. Lyellin 7 July 2005 05:44 (UTC)
 * While I agree with you, I have been criticized for blocking for too short of a time, and admins have exercised even 6-month-long blocks for this particular vandal.
 * If you agree with me, then do what you think is right- don't conceed to peer pressure. You and I disagree on most things- that doesn't mean I think since I have people who agree with me, you should just stop. Listen to their arguements, fight back, DISCUSS!. Lyellin 7 July 2005 05:48 (UTC)
 * You don't know what it's like, making 3,000 edits, and everybody only paying attention to the time I try to implement an easier publication system and making the lead article about 900,000 people in desperate need of humanitarian aid; and then trying to remove my sysop status, even though I've reverted more vandalism than any of them put together. :(  -- NGerda July 7, 2005 05:51 (UTC)
 * Nick, I'm sorry, but that garners NO sympathy from me. That's just whining. You've done great work. You've also done a lot of stuff taht just completly defies how Wikis are, and goes against the community. if you're gonna do that, get used to being liked, and disliked. Lyellin 7 July 2005 05:55 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but nobody ever told me what was wiki and what wasn't until now. That's the mistake made.  -- NGerda July 7, 2005 05:56 (UTC)
 * If it's the Ass Pus vandal (as this appears to be), I would feel absolutely free to block infinitely, or at least for as long as you like. This is the Willy on Wheels cross-project vandal who is to be blocked on sight. -- IlyaHaykinson 7 July 2005 05:57 (UTC)
 * At the time, the only change made was to put the wikithanks flower up. *shrugs* I've generally been of the opinion that you block what you need, and not more, but that's me. Lyellin 7 July 2005 06:00 (UTC)
 * See' Lyellin? -- NGerda July 7, 2005 05:58 (UTC)
 * *shrugs* Yes? Clearly Ilya and I have different opinons... that doesn't mean either one is right or wrong. Lyellin 7 July 2005 06:00 (UTC)
 * The Wikimedia board agrees with Ilya. -- NGerda July 7, 2005 06:01 (UTC)
 * *shakes head* This is pointless. It's like playing games with a Second Class Scout. Nick, I wish you a good evening, I've spent entirely too much time today not doing work because of Wikinews. Lyellin 7 July 2005 06:05 (UTC)

STOP
Please stop messing with wikinewwsnetwork pages and links whenever you get the chance, you are really pissing me off.--Ryan524 8 July 2005 18:21 (UTC)
 * oh and as for your unprotection of that media menu, good job, you're right afterall, vandals love to editi it too.--Ryan524 8 July 2005 18:26 (UTC)


 * WikiNews Network is currently in testing, and there is absolutely no Wikinews content broadcasting right now. I would be more then happy to add the link back once the network is up and running.  -- NGerda July 8, 2005 20:57 (UTC)

Deletion of Image:SF_cop_injured.jpg
You deleted Image:SF_cop_injured.jpg with the summary "Copyvio, taken directly from Indymedia news source".

If you look at the "About" page linked from url where that image is published ( &rarr; ) you will see that part of their mission is "To provide edited audio, video, and print stories [...] on the internet for independent media outlets and the general public.".

It is unfortunate that the Indymedia sites are not explicit about the copyright status of their content, as Wikimedia sites tend to be. It is also (imho) unfortunate that no-explicit-copyright-declaration must by default be interpreted as maximum-copyright-in-effect, but in this case, I believe that there is sufficient cause to believe the whoever the "rights-holder" of this image is intended to have it reused, especially in light of the statement to that effect on SF.Indymedia's "About" page and the lack of any formal copyright message whatsoever.

So although it is not explicitly licensed or released into the public domain, I think this image should qualify as fair use, as does the person who originally uploaded and tagged it as such. Please do not delete it again without further discussion.

Thanks for your many interesting contributions, btw. Leif 23:35, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I always welcome that. :)  However, our Fair use image policy clearly states that Photos from competing news organizations that are uploaded without permission can be deleted on sight.  This is why the image was deleted.  Best regards, NGerda 23:39, July 9, 2005 (UTC)

Indymedia image
Indymedia does have radio buttons to select whether the image is Public Domain or not, see options near bottom of page link. I cannot tell if the image is PD, but the upload log the Wikicommons said it is.... -Edbrown05 04:48, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * From what I could tell, it wasn't PD. In addition, Wikinews Fair use prohibits us from using images from competing news sources.  -- NGerda 04:50, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * The sf.Indymedia.org image was made available for replubish to any non-commercial site. True, it is not PD - it is are CC:BY. As far as I know, images do not have to be PD to be in the WN fair use section. -- Davodd | Talk 05:13, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I never said they did have to be PD, but Wikinews does not allow copyrighted images from competing news organizations. -- NGerda 05:15, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * This to me seems a case of an interested party to the demonstration wishing to participate here with a photo. Then it got slammed. -Edbrown05 05:24, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, if it was up to me, I would totally allow these images, but, unfortunately that's not how the rules are. -- NGerda 05:25, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd leave it be unless it was causing a problem. Indymedia allows us to use it. --RossKoepke 05:28, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I never saw Indymedia give us explicit permission to use their images. -- NGerda 05:29, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

What rule, read the bold print under Fair use on Wikinews like you mean it. It is talking about ripping off photos, not excluding them. Exclusion is non-participatory. -Edbrown05 05:30, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It clearly states: Photos from competing news organizations that are uploaded without permission can be deleted on sight. If you can show me where Indymedia has given us permission to use their image, I will gladly put the image back.  -- NGerda 05:33, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * It was clearly poorly worded. Which way are we headed here? To be restrictive or inclusive? -Edbrown05 05:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * This is not an issue of exclusion, it is a copyright issue. Wikinews is in the Public Domain, which means we have to be very careful not to include any copyrighted work without permission.  We want Wikinews to be freely distributable and copyable, so these measures are necessary.  -- NGerda 05:41, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Pain in the butt. Fair use notice I don't see the same pic located at Richmond action page cited with the fair use stuff. -Edbrown05 05:52, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

It's 'fair use'. Pic is located on this page -Edbrown05 06:00, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * That it the web site's claim of Fair use immunity, which does not mean that the images contained there are necessarily Fair use. From their disclaimer: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.  -- NGerda 06:07, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Under our current fair use policy this photo would not qualify. Also keep in mind that other non-news sites have a very different set of what they can use as fair use. Our current fair use policy assumes that any usable images that are not free can go onto commons. In cases like this where permission is granted to distribute but photos can not be uploaded commons or used under fair use we can not use them. I would recommend proposing the addition of by permission photos or CC-NC to our list of useable image types. --Cspurrier 14:42, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

If our current policy does actually prohibit us from using indymedia images, then I think the policy needs to be changed! Indymedia and Wikinews are not competitors; they are both non-profit endeavors to publish content for free, and both encourage the republishing of their content. So anyway, whats happening with those indymedia images now? Looking at the deletion log, it appears they have both been undeleted, but the article using them (San Fransisco anti-G8 rally turns violent) still shows broken images for both. Leif 23:18, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * While I agree with your spirit, there's a distinct difference between free as in beer, and free as in speech. Wikinews is free as in copyright free, hence the All content of Wikinews is in the Public Domain.  Indymedia does not relinquish all copyright as Wikinews requires for its content.  -- NGerda 23:25, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Articles to be finished
Sudan Ahnald in Kullyfournyeea

Wikimedia board members are just regular users like us..

 * A Wikimedia board member has expressed opposition to your Noncommercial image template. Many administrators are upset at your unilateral modifications to our Fair use policy.  Please discuss this at Wikinews Future talk.  -- NGerda 19:10, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikimedia board members have to follow the same rules as everyone else. They are not individual dictators, so they also must discuss and justify their actions to the community - or individual users. If an issue is not clear in current WN policy, then it should be discussed before decisions to ban certain types of content are made. As for the policy - it is a "proposed policy" that invites WN individaul members to make changes and mods to it. We are in beta, afterall. ;-) -- Davodd | Talk 19:32, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikimedia board members know the official Wikimedia policies- which is what we are required to adhere to. -- NGerda 19:44, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Maybe they should read: Image use policy - under "Grants of license." CC-BY-NC falls under that - not fair use. -- Davodd | Talk 05:13, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Here's a nice little analogy for you: Wikinews policies are like state laws, and Wikimedia policies are like federal laws. Wikimedia has overriding precedence over Wikinews policies, especially in this case.  -- NGerda 06:28, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

IRC chatting
In response to this message:
 * Davodd, please bring this up to the Wikimedia folks at #Wikimedia. Thanks!  -- NGerda 07:08, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't use IRC very often since it messes with my firewall. Anyway, I have been one of the Wikimedia folks myself for a while now. But, if you mean the Board, I'm not hiding anywhere and each of the board members has my personal email address (or easy access to it) - or my various talk pages or the listserves, so they know where to find me if they really want to talk to me. ;-) -- Davodd | Talk 08:18, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

NASA article
Wow. It's pretty cool to be working on an article at the same time that you are. I'm very flattered. (nasa directory article)
 * Yup, I experience it every day ;) -- NGerda 08:47, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Site news
Cool! But I must make a bit of a correction, Dan was way ahead of me and actually managed to get the reporting together while I was running around a bit panicking :) Look forward to seeing what you come up with! Have you looked at the Somalia story recently? Am hoping to get it covered in my magazine (which makes it work!) so should be able to update. ClareWhite 09:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I was trying to figure out how to credit him, you can give it a shot if you want. ; ) The Somalia story got a little fragmented after Dan100 made some page moves... Oh well. I'm back to working!  -- NGerda 09:39, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

UK category
sorry about removing.. thought it was something mediawiki had added automatically for some reason.
 * No problem at all! It's my fault.  Just next time, if the country is wrong, change it to the correct category. Cheers! -- NGerda 19:43, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Undeletion
In my short time on wikinews, it seems like I keep seeing you delete things that I think should be (a) subject to discussion and (b) not deleted.

Would you please undelete Correction: NASA corporate directory not leaked for reasons explained at Water cooler/policy? And would you also please undelete the indymedia images you deleted, for reasons explained at the policy water cooler and also Wikinews talk:Image use policy? I still think these images qualify under our fair use policy, as apparently do other people, but even if they didn't qualify as fair use, Image use policy actually says very clearly "Images with license grants may be subject to certain requirements. This may include their use in derivative works, requirements of attribution, or their use in only non-commercial works." and "Images with a grant of license must be uploaded to Wikinews locally, and not to the Wikimedia Commons."

So will you undelete these items? Please?

Also, if it turns out that there is actually consensus to delete the NASA correction article, you should also delete the original which is now a broken redirect. Leif 21:14, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I will undelete the Correction article as you request, but there are serious issues with regards to the images. The Wikimedia Foundation has let their policy be known that copyrighted images from Indymedia cannot be used.  Our Fair use policy, which was difficult to get ratified, clearly states that we cannot use images from other news organizations. -- NGerda 21:19, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * According to Wikinews talk:Image use policy the fair use statement approved by the board allows "breaking news" type images. BUT that is utterly beside the point, as these images qualify outside the fair use policy, under the "grants of license" section on the image use page. Leif 21:48, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * They are images from a competing news organization, which is prohibited under our image policy. -- NGerda 22:02, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

I am re deleting the article. No correction needs to be issued, as the original article was patently false and may be deleted onsight according to our Speedy Deletion policy. -- NGerda 21:27, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for undeleting the article and then re deleting it. I would welcome hearing what changed your mind and then changed it back. Leif 21:48, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Chiacomo reminded me that Patent falsness, which the article is, may be deleted on sight by a Wikinews administrator. -- NGerda 22:02, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Somalia and others
Just thought you might like to know we're still following the Somalia story here (it still hasn't been reported in any British mainstream press, just BBC online), they are working on releasing the ship but as it stands they have ONE week worth of food. Don't know if there's a current story in it? ClareWhite 08:51, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * OMG, I'll write up a story as soon as I finish with some policy stuff. IRIN News is probably our best source.  Plus we can user their images. -- NGerda 08:52, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

oh yes and I said there were others too, though actually this might be more one for dan100 should he be watching...

prebombs but still worth getting online sonehow: the zimbabwean government managed to get large amounts of people to demolish their own houses last week by charging them 150 dollars if the government bulldozers did it for them. where would they send the bills to? think its on irin too. anyway, hopefully tomorrow i'll have some time to do some updates. world food programme confirmed today that there's been no progress on the hijacked ship. i'll leave you alone now :) CW
 * No, please, don't leave me alone! :P -- NGerda 18:07, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

infobox
How does one update that? Or can you? -Edbrown05 18:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm sure I can do that for you, but what infobox? -- NGerda 18:20, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not locating "pre-war intelligence/infobox", but here's an example from Wendy finger incident. Wendy's infobox -Edbrown05 18:27, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Those are all editable by anyone. In the code for an article, when it says , just copy the Blah Blah infobox text and add Template to the beginning like so: Template:Blah Blah infobox.  Cheers! -- NGerda 18:30, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Nick
I got you on copyrighted titles. --Wimtennis2005 17:05, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Good. :) -- NGerda 17:06, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

Any of the photo's work? --Wimtennis2005 17:31, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, photos already on Commons are acceptable. -- NGerda 17:38, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

How do I upload them? --130.111.96.155 17:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Alligator_grin-scubadive67.jpg --Wimtennis2005 17:44, 14 July 2005 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Alligator_grin-scubadive67.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Aliigator]] -- NGerda

portals it is then!
I thought the portal idea might be the same but it seemed to be all about categories whereas my proposal is about how humans would run it. could my ideas be incorporated into a plan of action if eloquence's ideas are adopted? CW (on phone)
 * The category system would greatly ease the workload off of neighborhood "portals", as all articles tagged with that neighborhood would be automatically listed in any way they wanted. This could include Sports, Politics, or any other category like that.  So, I think the portal idea is best, and it still leaves the portal open for customization. ;) -- NGerda 16:12, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

"Copyvio"
You marked 'Mastermind' of London bombings captured in Egypt "copyvio" (using the incorrect method, btw) but left no explanation. Please do not do this - next time explain what you think the copyvio is, so people can actually do something about. Dan100 (Talk) 20:23, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

3rd lead
oops, anyway I like waxman story for 3rd lead, but am afraid some might think it has an agenda, i.e. Ross. What do you think?-Edbrown05 10:11, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
 * OMG, I was just about to report on that! Run it, it's newsworthy and no one else is reporting on it. -- NGerda 10:12, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Beliefs are beliefs, but:
I believe largely in a free market economy with some government intervention at the corporate level - that is a capitalist economy with more government regulation of large business deals. --NGerda: Technocratic_movement -- Ross Koepke Talk 08:14, 18 July 2005 (UTC)