Wikinews:Water cooler/assistance/archives/2012/August

What's up, my peeps??!!
Is it just me, or do we have LOADS of reviewers who haven't done much reviewing here in a LONG, LONG TIME?? --Bddpaux (talk) 22:44, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * We really need to get that planned policy in place to automatically de-reviewer after a year's inactivity. I put forth a draft for discussion some months ago to get feedback, got some feedback, and deliberately let it run over a month and get archived to be sure there was plenty of time for comment.  Now that ArbCom elections are over, I mean to resurrect it and propose it as a policy.  Just have to find time to do so.  --Pi zero (talk) 23:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I would support such a policy. :) --LauraHale (talk) 03:53, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and another thing: if you find yourself going to the Recent changes and hit "Reviewers" you're taken to Reviewing -- when it would only seem rational that you'd be taken to a list of Reviewers, doesn't it? --Bddpaux (talk) 00:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe we should have a huge campaign to get inactive Reviewers back in the game!? --Bddpaux (talk) 00:48, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Nah. Part of the point of the policy I'd crafted is that if you haven't reviewed in a long time, you're probably both rusty and out-of-touch with the community, and going through the process of requesting the bit back is an opportunity to bond with the community and get up to speed with things.  --Pi zero (talk) 02:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Im new!
Hey Im new! Any tips for n00bs? Guptakhy (talk) 01:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Style guide is your friend. Beyond that, look at articles that have been published for examples of how the style guide actually is realised. :)  Talk pages are often just as useful to look at as the actual article because it gives an idea of the dialog you may have with a reviewer. :) --LauraHale (talk) 06:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

FoIA - Help may be required

 * Good news! Just walked in the door to less mail than I'd feared. However, this includes a DVD from the Office of the Speaker with as much data on websites that both houses have been accessing. :-D
 * I'm going to take an initial look, then dump the data onto the Journo's workspace. --Brian McNeil / talk 08:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Started with the obvious search, and I wonder who has been accessing http://feetlegsandsex.tumblr.com/ http://footsex66.tumblr.com/ --Brian McNeil / talk 09:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * For those with JWS access who want a look, here's the linky: http://jws.wikinewsie.org/wiki/Communications_Data_Bill/Parliament_responds --Brian McNeil / talk 09:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna be all over this. This is brilliant. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 12:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Somebody.....anybody
Could some reviewer......any reviewer pass or fail the West Nile article and the India's nuclear power article? I wrote one and helped too much with the other. I get weird indigestion when articles float waiting too long to be published. Heck, just rubber stamp fail 'em both.....at least they'll be dealt with. --Bddpaux (talk)
 * Anxiety over articles aging on the review queue. Welcome to my world.
 * Granted you're talking about not-ready reviews, but still, don't ever ask for a rubber stamp, even in jest. ("Some things", a saying goes, "some people don't think are funny.")
 * I looked over the India article, and found some obvious and rather serious problems; I tried to stick to just-the-facts in my review comments, but my opinion is the sourcing on that article has gone over a brink from which it will not be recovered.
 * I looked very quickly at the West Nile OR, and made a feeble attempt to fix the headline problem; but I can't tell whether it's okay, it might be, so intense reviewer attention is needed for a full review, and atm my eyelids are getting heavy.
 * --Pi zero (talk) 02:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)