User talk:Psusen

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay! If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.

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 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!

Iraq ballot
Hi :)

I wouldn't normally jump into a story so quickly that you are actively working on; but it was published (rather than 'developing'), and is important news, and who knows maybe a car would drive thru yours or my house any moment before the Print Edition is due out!! Best regards. -Edbrown05 23:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi again :)


 * At some point, as the election results become less speculative, a new story should be started. Glad you are keeping an eye on developments. Best regards -Edbrown05 18:46, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Iraq election
I think the update is interesting. Just put it with a new title, like "Iraq vote optimism premature" in "submit a story" and I will work on it also tomorrow. Neutralizer 23:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ok I just moved your entire update to a new story.Optimism over Iraq's vote now in question in developing Neutralizer 23:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry, would you please finish the story? I have trouble being objective as I consider the entire "vote while occupied" a flawed process. Neutralizer 14:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

record of 'Optimism over Iraqi vote' story
Hi! I put a record of this story here for your use. I will be making some major changes to the story in 'Developing'. Please add to that in any way you see fit. Basically, I want to make that story specific to latest events (a day or two) on the vote counts. Best regards. -Edbrown05 23:15, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

October 21, 2005

Remember the referendum? Last weekend the world's airwaves were full of broadcasts about the success of the voting in which millions "defied the insurgents" by turning out to cast their ballots. Then we heard preliminary but "informed" speculation that the constitution had passed. Majorities of Kurds and Shiites had given it enthusiastic support in the north and south-east. In Sunni areas, where voters had been expected to reject it, not enough had come forward to turn it down.

The rule was that if two-thirds of voters in any three provinces rejected the constitution, it would fail. Election officials conceded that two-thirds had done so in the two fiercely anti-American provinces that include Falluja, Ramadi and Tikrit. But Nineveh, which Sunnis share with Kurds and Christians, had apparently not produced a big enough no vote.

Initial figures leaked by electoral officials suggested the "yes" vote won in 16 of Iraq's 18 provinces, with a vast majority in Salahuddin and Anbar voting "no." That would mean the constitution's passage, but it is not known how the audit will affect the final figures.

Six days after the election, the world still waits for the official outcome of the Iraq election on the draft constitution. The result of Iraq's constitutional referendum will not be announced for at least another day or two, a senior official of the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq (IECI) said on Friday. The Oct. 15 referendum on a constitution opposed by many Sunni Arabs had been expected to pass, but officials have been recounting the ballots in some areas because of unusual patterns of reported results. The outcome of the election is not certain.

The vote count in Nineveh may hold the key. According to the widely cited preliminary figures announced by the spokesman for the IECI in Nineveh, 326,000 people voted for the constitution and 90,000 against. Those figures were said to be based on results from more than 90 percent of the 300 polling stations in the province. Relying on those "unofficial" figures, the media reported that the constitution appeared to have been passed, on the assumption that the Sunnis had failed to muster the necessary two-thirds "no" vote in Nineveh. No further official results have been released by the IECI since then. However, according to the U.S. military liaison with the IECI in Nineveh, Maj. Jeffrey Houston, the final totals for the province were 424,491 "no" votes and 353,348 "yes" votes. This means that the earlier figures actually represented only 54 percent of the official vote total, not 90 percent. It now appears that the votes which had not been revealed earlier went against the constitution by a ratio more than 12 to 1. However, even if the numbers reported by Major Houston are correct, that would represent only a 54% rejection of the draft constitution in Nineveh, not the two-thirds required.

The final figures revealed by the U.S. military liaison with the IECI suggest a voter turnout in Nineveh that is far below some projections based on similar results in comparable sections of Iraq. On a day when Sunni turnout reached 88 percent in Salahuddin province and 90 percent in Fallujah, a total of only 778,000 votes, the 60 percent tally of the eligible voters in Nineveh appears anomalous. The critical question on which the outcome of the election would turn therefore is the validity of the vote count in Nineveh.

Several news organizations are now reporting that the credibility of Iraq’s constitutional referendum has been undermined by allegations of vote rigging in as many as 12 of the country’s 18 provinces. The alleged "vote rigging" could be of serious significance in Nineveh and Diyala, two Sunni majority provinces. In at least one, it was expected that no votes would approach the two-thirds level. If that had happened, the constitution would be rejected because in two other Sunni provinces, Salaheddin and Anbar, two thirds of voters have apparently said ‘no’. Early reporting of the vote in Nineveh, where the largely Sunni city of Mosul is the capital, suggested that 70-80 per cent of voters had rejected the controversial document. Therefore, it was surprising when official results indicated that there was an overwhelming vote in favour.

Chief electoral officer Adel Alami is on record saying the voting figures were a matter of concern. Some election personnel have also questioned remarks by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the Constitution appeared to have been approved. Hussein Hindawi, an official at the commission, said he was "surprised" by the observation. Karina Parelli, head of the United Nations Election Assistance Team in Iraq, also questioned Dr. Rice's controversial statement. Iraq's election commission announced Monday that officials were investigating "unusually high" numbers of "yes" votes in about a dozen provinces during Iraq's landmark referendum on a new constitution, raising questions about irregularities in the balloting. The Electoral Commission made no mention of fraud, and an official with knowledge of the election process cautioned that it was too early to say whether the unusual numbers were incorrect or if they would have an effect on the outcome.

The Bush administration has touted last weekend's referendum in Iraq as progress but analysts said on Monday the new constitution was too ambiguous and that violence still overshadowed Iraq's political future. Partial results from Saturday's referendum indicated a victory for the constitution the United States hopes will help stabilize Iraq and ultimately lead to 156,000 U.S. troops coming home.

The historic Iraqi vote on the proposed draft constitution ended on Saturday, and ballots are now being tallied. Initial reports show the draft constitution will be supported. Security during voting day was tightened, although the U.S. military has announced that five American soldiers and a marine were killed by a bomb blast on the day of the referendum, bringing the U.S. death toll in Iraq to 1,971.

Early returns showed the vote was split as was expected along largely communal lines. Opponents failed to secure the necessary two-thirds "no" vote in any three of Iraqi's 18 provinces, according to counts that local officials provided to The Associated Press. In the crucial central provinces with mixed ethnic and religious populations, enough Shiites and Kurds voted to block the Sunni attempt to reject the constitution. Local election officials gave a picture of a strong "Yes" vote in the Shiite Muslim provinces of the south, and of a substantial "No" vote in the Sunni Arab heartlands of the north and west.

Rejection of the draft constitution appears to be impossible according to initial vote counts reported in the three key provinces that Sunni Arab opponents relied on to defeat the draft constitution. Opponents need a two-thirds "no" vote in three of those provinces. They may have reached the threshold in Anbar and Salahuddin, but Diyala and Ninevah provinces appeared to have gone strongly "Yes".

According to the Arab News, it is probable that the Iraqis have agreed to the new constitution. It is believed that its passing is almost certain because the majority, both Shiite and Kurds, supported it. The Sunnis, on the other hand, have looked at the constitution as a "death sentence." They fear that the document, drafted as it was by a Kurdish-Shiite-dominated Parliament, will ultimately divide Iraq into three separate districts: a powerful ministate of Kurds in the north, the majority Shiites in the south, both capitalizing on Iraq’s oil wealth, and the Sunnis, according to this scenario, would be left impoverished and isolated somewhere in the middle.

President Bush referred to the vote as a victory for opponents of terrorism. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, speaking in London as the vote-count in Iraq was in progress, said the draft constitution had probably passed. Rice said later the final result was still not known. An unofficial tally is expected on Thursday and a final announcement on Oct. 24, senior electoral official Farid Ayyar stated on Sunday. It is expected that the official count will take several days.

Electoral officials estimated that as many as 10 million of Iraq's eligible 15.5 million voters cast ballots, which would yield a turnout of around 63 to 64 percent. In the January election which approved their interim government, 58 percent of voters turned out.

President Bush said in his weekly radio address Saturday that the weekend election is a critical step forward in the quest for democracy in Iraq. For the draft constitution to be approved after the months of negotiations by lawmakers in Iraq's transitional National Assembly, a majority of voters must support it. With what is believed to be strong support in Shiite and Kurdish communities, who together account for more than three-quarters of the population, the 50% threshold is expected to be met.

A rejection of the draft constitution would be viewed by coalition members as serious blow to the political evolution in Iraq that followed the U.S. led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003. The transitional assembly would be dissolved, and the process of writing a new constitution would have to start all over after a new assembly could be elected in December. Regardless of the outcome, Iraq will hold parliamentary elections on December 15, the office of the President said on Sunday.

A new, permanent government, could possibly clear the way for the United States and its coalition allies to begin a withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

some general info. for you
Hi!

Here's a little stuff to help understand how things are customarily done around here:
 * 1) on a story's discussion page, if chose to 'add comment', in the input box describe the topic of the post rather than input your UserName (this is more descriptive for everybody on the 'Recent changes' page)
 * 2) Each contributor has a UserPage and a TalkPage created by default when they register an account. When you communicate with another user, post comments on their TalkPage rather than on their UserPage.
 * 3) Your UserPage is your turf, where the convention here is that all are invited to look, but nobody but you posts to it.

-Edbrown05 01:24, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Please help us here at wikinews
I hope you will try to spend as much time on our site as possible. We desperately need some more good reporters/editors with guts and tenacity. Neutralizer 18:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * see what I mean? Neutralizer 22:28, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay...
I felt the article deserved a very in-depth analysis as to what and why it does not meet NPOV at this time. The article concept is excellent, but there are basic journalistic elements it does not meet. I hope you will take this critique as it is meant - an attempt to improve an article which has good potential. Frankly, I don't put in this much effort unless I think the article, and contributor, is both timely and valuable. - Amgine / talk 22:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Good story today
Thanks for writing it, and sorry to see that it got caught up in a wrangle.

Rcameronw 22:55, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Honduran flag
Here's an image on Commons that might be sufficient...Honduran flag.

I once tried to write a narrow focus story that in the end, it was only worth a paragraph of ink. I think that I was able to merge the content with another story. I kept an eye towards that on the story of your in developing, but in the end couldn't see how to make it work. My best suggestion would be at this point to back date it to the 24th, if that is appropriate. Best regards. -Edbrown05 01:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Libby lead-in
Sorry for un-doing some of the work you did on the lead. I thought it was important to get the flow directed towards the context of what Lewes did do, which was not leak (no charge there), rather it was he did not come clean with the investigators. -Edbrown05 20:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

2 questions
Can you define "senior White House official"? Also, is there a news-worthy distinction to be made beteen White House officials who resigned before being indicted and one who is indicted before resigning? --JWSchmidt 14:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)