Wikinews:Water cooler/assistance

Page last updated: Saturday 07 at {{evalx|(apply + (split (get-arg 2) ":"))|{{CU

Review Category Not Working

Its giving me an error anyone know why? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm receiving the same and posted as well here: Wikinews:Admin_action_alerts#TypeError_when_viewing_category:review. I don't know if that would be something we need to go to Phabricator about or not. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I opened the following ticket with Phabricator: T371986 —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary workaround:https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere?target=Template%3AReview&namespace=0&hidelinks=1&hideredirs=1 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 15:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was fixed yesterday and the Phabricator ticket has been closed. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photo exhibition “Ethnic features of the world people” took place in the Crimean capital

The article has been edited by the author, according to the requirements specified on the discussion page. The material has been in standby mode for a long time. Please review the article. Виктор Пинчук (talk) 05:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The article contains abundant visual material on ethnography and is related not to any particular country or continent, but to the entire planet Earth. — Виктор Пинчук (talk) 05:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Виктор Пинчук I don't think this is right place to ask for a review, there have been no reviews in 5 weeks because there isn't enough active people. There is no reason your article should have priority over anyone else's when some is available, anyways. (As a side note, 3 reviewers who make up the majority of reviews have stated they will not pass your articles in their current form, so you may have trouble there). Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 15:43, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"There isn't enough active people" — This cannot be a reason for deleting an article concerning the ethnography of many continents of the planet earth. — Виктор Пинчук (talk) 16:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't enough active...to review it before it goes stale.@Виктор Пинчук Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 02:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This cannot be a reason to delete a quality article. Besides, ethnography (to which the topic of the article belongs) does not become outdated. News of a political nature can become outdated. Let's wait. — Виктор Пинчук (talk) 06:01, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

English Wikinews is a news project. All of our policies and guidelines center on publishing news, which is defined by a stated level of WN:Freshness (generally, seven days). While there is leniency provided to original reporting, that leniency clearly isn't boundless. While I do support leaving your OR articles in the review queue for up to eight weeks before marking them stale[1], I don't agree that by calling them 'ethnography' they become limitless in freshness.

Exclusive content has the potential to extend our freshness horizon by days or even weeks, depending on the nature of the original material.
– WN:NEWINFO

OR extends the freshness horizon, but does not remove it. And again, I think a reviewer should clarify the level of leniency OR is afforded as it relates to Freshness. Until then, I think non-reviewers should stick to established precedent.

—Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:36, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael.C.Wright as previously stated, 8 weeks would clearly be considered way too long by our 2 most active reviewers. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 16:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Me Da Wikipedian, I don't see where any reviewer said something like that. Can you provide a quote/diff? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something.

I see a partial conversation happening about freshness[2] (among other things), yes. But I don't see where anyone stated specifically X weeks are "clearly considered way too long."

Bddpaux did inform Viktor "we have to turn off the switch on these"[3], but then proceeded to publish the article after changes were made by the author.[4] Like I said elsewhere[5], consider what that communicates to the author: the publication notes state "You have done a decent job on re-focusing on the 'exhibition' as the news event." So if I were the author, I'd make sure the exhibition is the focal event for future articles, which was what was done on the latest article pending review. Bddpaux's notes and the fact that they published the article both reinforce the notion that 1. reviewers have found value in Viktor's posts and 2. for that reason they have afforded Viktor's articles significant leniency regarding Freshness.

I see where @Bddpaux said "I probably [emphasis added] won't stretch it (time-wise) this far again."[6] But this is much different from saying X weeks is way too long.

I also see where Cromium proposed "the two weeks it says the exhibition is running for" for that specific article (not broadly for all OR).[7] Tthat is not the same as saying something like 'OR freshness is limited to two weeks.' No other reviewer responded to that specific recommendation so I wouldn't interpret that as any type of consensus.

If anything, I do see reinforced consensus that OR 'gets significant leeway with freshness.' I don't see any consensus on what qualifies as significant or excessive for that matter beyond precedents set by previous publication of stale content. ––Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 18:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael.C.Wright please read this thread for an example. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 03:28, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I linked to it above to show that I've read it. I quoted from it. I haven't found any mention of '8 weeks being considered way too long,' even though I personally feel it is.

If that’s the consensus, it would be helpful for reviewers to clearly state it and apply it consistently in their reviews. While I expect this might be addressed in the future, I haven't seen any clear guidance or consistent action on it yet. As things stand, the precedents are set around 7.5 - 8 weeks for this author's OR, and that's what I’ll continue to follow. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:56, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael.C.Wright if 4 weeks is too long, that 8 weeks is too long naturally follows. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 03:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Виктор Пинчук no, but the article going stale (because of no active reviewers) is. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 16:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, rules are important (both in this project and everywhere in our lives). But I will add a little logic. A certain political event or natural disaster could only happen on a specific date. While a photo exhibition dedicated to the annual holiday "Archaeologist's Day" celebrated on July 12 could well have taken place in the same form on July 12, 2025. Correct me if I am wrong. P.S. Moreover, I will say honestly, this exhibition was planned for July 12, 2023, but due to the circumstances, the museum could not accept it. (So now we see an event of 2023, unrealized:-). In this case, the concepts of "new" and "old" are relative.— Виктор Пинчук (talk) 17:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I get that, but there must be some point at which a story is no longer new, and it must be a reasonable point. The rest of the above is really myself and Michael.C.Wright disagreeing on what reviewers think qualifies as new for this article.@Виктор Пинчук Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 03:29, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In defense of the article

Only in my articles can the news user (external and internal) see the photographs presented at the exhibition (no matter whether they are good or bad) in order to evaluate them. Reporter has no right to do this: he can only make a report, photographing the action and participants of the event. Do you feel the difference?

I appeal to the reviewers: "Please check the article" — Виктор Пинчук (talk) 05:22, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Виктор Пинчук "I think my article is useful and important" (which most authors think their articles are) is not a get-out-of-staleness-free card. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 05:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews currently has 16 reviewers. — Виктор Пинчук (talk) 15:06, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Виктор Пинчук no article has been reviewed in 6 weeks...because there are no active reviewers. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 15:36, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really think we need to reach a conclusion on this larger situation. Again: I like Viktor's photos -- they are super awesome! But, there is a QUAGMIRE of COI problems at play here and I am unclear if he grasps that properly. He loves to lead off with 'Russian WN attended a lecture on bla-bla in Crimea'. Yes: but YOU WERE RUSSIAN WN AT THAT EVENT!! An event where YOU were talking about a trip YOU TOOK WHILE SHOWING THE PHOTOS YOU TOOK. There could be some work-arounds on this kind of stuff, and again: I value the photos! I do! But this format/style-of-delivery does not work here.--Bddpaux (talk) 14:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bddpaux I that someone needs to explain in relatively simple English what the issue is and how to fix it, preferably on their talk page (and that 3 reviewers now wont pass their articles) Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 15:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have done that (hopefully well) at Viktor's Talk page.--Bddpaux (talk) 18:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BINI and SB19 Recognized as 'Voices of Asia' by Billboard Korea

Requires editing for language and include clarification what these things are. I think the author may have a language barrier. Could someone please assist? Gryllida (talk) 10:56, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review please 2024-09-03 England: Staffordshire town celebrates LGBTQ+ pride despite funding issues

Hi @Heavy Water, @Bddpaux, @Cromium, @Chaetodipus, @JJLiu112, @LivelyRatification, @Microchip08, @RockerballAustralia, @SVTCobra, @Tom Morris, @Tyrol5

Hope you're doing well.

You're on my active-and-possibly-available Reviewers list, could you please review this at your convenience, it is outside of my scope, topic is too confusing for me to be comfortable:
- England: Staffordshire town celebrates LGBTQ+ pride despite funding issues (event occurred 2 days ago)
To opt out of being highlighted about each new draft being submitted for review, please reply and write 'Gryllida, I don't wish to be notified anymore' or 'Gryllida, I only wish to be notified of (region/country e.g. 'India' or 'Japan') and (topic e.g. 'law' or 'science') from now on', I will remember it.
- I will also remove you from my list after 7 counts of highlights to which there is no response. Apologies for the noise, I believe (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I am open to suggestions), it might be useful given that there was only one story published in the last two months here. Meanwhile I am trying to copyedit, even for stories outside of my ability to fully review.

There are also several other stories in Newsroom which expired or are going to expire freshness soon, according to the current freshness guide which is 7 days or less, with longer times for Original Reporting (correct me if I'm wrong), please check:

August 27 (6 days ago) - Billboard Korea recognizes Philippine P-Pop groups BINI and SB19 as 'Voices of Asia'
August 27 (6 days ago) - UN secretary-general warns about rising sea levels
August 24 (9 days ago) - Destructive windstorm hits São Paulo, Brazil: 3 injured and gusts reach 80 km/h
June (over 2 months ago) - UN secretary-general warns about rising sea levels

Thanks, Gryllida (talk) 23:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Education Minister Jason Clare proposes legislation prioritizing rural institutions in international students cap

Last possible day to review today; the story was sitting abandoned for 3 days due to me not paying attention after writing it. If not reviewed today, this will be taken off the queue. Thanks. --Gryllida (talk) 00:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

downgraded to stale, changed to possible OR, next section below Gryllida (talk) 01:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

draft of questions #or #australia #education #politics

Hi all, please have a look and assist with devising the list of questions to ask to get input from several political organizations. Thank you! Gryllida (talk) 01:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]