Erik Moeller | 2 Dec 22:02 2004
Picon
Picon

Setting up Wikinews languages

Hi,

now that we're about to move demo.wikinews.org to en.wikinews.org, we have  
to think about a procedure for setting up other language domains. If any  
decision on this matter has already been made by the Board, please let me  
know.

It should be noted that on two of the language voting pages, no majority  
was reached on starting the project. These are French and Chinese. Others  
had very small participation.

In the original proposal, I suggested that Wikinews can be set up in any  
accepted Wikimedia project language where there is at least one interested  
participant, and that 4 more regulars are required for the language to be  
recognized as "official", and for the firsts sysops to be created.

I would like to ask the Board if this procedure is acceptable.

If it is not, one possible alternative would be to immediately set up  
language domains for any language where there are more than 10 votes on  
the respective voting page on Meta, and more than 50% in favor. This would  
currently mean Japanese and German. The vote could be re-opened, and kept  
open permanently.

In any case, I would ask for the immediate authorization of  
de.wikinews.org, as there was overwhelming support on the German voting  
page for starting the project, there has been some German press coverage  
on it, and there is already much interest on the German mailing list.

Regards,
(Continue reading)

Erik Moeller | 2 Dec 22:10 2004
Picon
Picon

Wikinews Licensing

During the brainstorming phase of the project, we ran a small straw poll  
on what the preferred license for Wikinews content would be:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/License_straw_poll

The content that is currently on the Demo wiki is in the public domain in  
order to facilitate the migration to any other license. In the straw poll,  
there is currently a small lead in favor of using dual licensing, but the  
opinions on what licenses to use differ: Some think we should dual-license  
as copyleft, others believe that we should allow non-copyleft uses for the  
sake of simplicity. The straw poll as such is not very conclusive.

If there are no objections, I will go ahead and hold a real vote on the  
issue as soon as demo.wikinews.org is moved to en.wikinews.org. However,  
please note that this is a rather far-reaching decision, so Board input  
would be appreciated.

Regards,

Erik
Mathias Schindler | 2 Dec 22:10 2004
Picon

Re: Setting up Wikinews languages

Erik Moeller wrote:

> It should be noted that on two of the language voting pages, no majority  
> was reached on starting the project. These are French and Chinese. Others  
> had very small participation.

...maybe due to the fact that the poll procedure started with english as 
the first page where to place your vote. At least that's what I did.

> In any case, I would ask for the immediate authorization of  
> de.wikinews.org, as there was overwhelming support on the German voting  
> page for starting the project, there has been some German press coverage  
> on it, and there is already much interest on the German mailing list.

I support that.

Mathias
Erik Moeller | 2 Dec 22:46 2004
Picon
Picon

wikinews-l created

A while back, Jimbo asked me to create a wikinews-l mailing list for  
discussing the project. I had done so, but had not yet announced it  
properly. So here it is:

        http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l

Unless there are any good reasons not to, I will create accompanying  
language mailing lists for the different language versions when they are  
created (wikinews-de-l etc.).

Regards,

Erik
Robin Shannon | 3 Dec 01:12 2004
Picon

Re: Wikinews Licensing

Does anyone have any info on the discussions between jimbo, lessig and
rms re: cc-by-sa and gfdl compatibility. If it looks like it is going
to happen sometime in the not to distant future, then perhaps some of
this discussion won't be as important.

paz y amor,
[[User:The bellman]]
rjs

On 02 Dec 2004 22:10:00 +0100, Erik Moeller <erik_moeller@...> wrote:
> During the brainstorming phase of the project, we ran a small straw poll
> on what the preferred license for Wikinews content would be:
> 
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/License_straw_poll
> 
> The content that is currently on the Demo wiki is in the public domain in
> order to facilitate the migration to any other license. In the straw poll,
> there is currently a small lead in favor of using dual licensing, but the
> opinions on what licenses to use differ: Some think we should dual-license
> as copyleft, others believe that we should allow non-copyleft uses for the
> sake of simplicity. The straw poll as such is not very conclusive.
> 
> If there are no objections, I will go ahead and hold a real vote on the
> issue as soon as demo.wikinews.org is moved to en.wikinews.org. However,
> please note that this is a rather far-reaching decision, so Board input
> would be appreciated.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Erik
(Continue reading)

Jens Ropers | 3 Dec 01:47 2004

Re: Wikinews Licensing

I'm not active in Wikinews and I don't know whether I'll ever join -- 
but anyway, here are my 2 eurocents as regards the licensing issue:

(1)
While WP compatibility might seem like a real important and convenient 
thing, IMHO coming to that conclusion is fallacious (as in [[logical 
fallacy]]):
- WP compatibility is pretty much only needed if people want to 
DUPLICATE (ie. not rewrite) content from the WP.
- Wikinews was was expressly advertised as a project that would NOT 
simply duplicate WP content.
Thus, I believe the "requirement" for WP license compatibility is much 
less than one might think.

(2)
I would ''strongly'' argue for a public domain "license". As they say: 
Yesterday's news is used to wrap fish tomorrow. For a news site like 
Wikinews, the biggest asset will likely turn out to be an active, 
striving contributor community. Yes, a PD "license" would dramatically 
lessen Wikinews' control over content reuse, but any static copies will 
quickly become outdated and only serve as far as their archive value 
goes (real obnoxious automated content grabbing sited could be 
blocked). Users will thus figure out pretty quickly that the real McCoy 
is at wikinews.org. So little is lost by going PD and PD is what news 
should be. Any writing "for posteriority" (where you might have bigger 
concerns over content reuse) probably belongs at wikipedia.org anyway.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com

(Continue reading)

Angela | 3 Dec 02:17 2004
Picon

Re: Setting up Wikinews languages

> Now that we're about to move demo.wikinews.org to en.wikinews.org, we have
> to think about a procedure for setting up other language domains.

I support moving the demo to a URL which makes it clear the project is
not temporary. However, it is also important to make clear to readers
that the project is in Beta to avoid responses to the site being
overly-critical in these early stages. This could be done via a
beta.wikinews.org URL, but this becomes more complicated once other
language domains are added, so perhaps a message in the site notice,
or on the logo, would be more appropriate.

> In the original proposal, I suggested that Wikinews can be set up in any
> accepted Wikimedia project language where there is at least one interested
> participant, and that 4 more regulars are required for the language to be
> recognized as "official", and for the firsts sysops to be created.

There is a proposed policy for new languages at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy_for_wikis_in_new_languages

There may be reasons for Wikinews to follow a different procedure to
our other wikis though, since the process of creating a news site
really needs more users than an encyclopedia. The proposed language
policy currently states five users are needed. If this does not
change, then the same policy can be applied to Wikinews.

> If it is not, one possible alternative would be to immediately set up
> language domains for any language where there are more than 10 votes on
> the respective voting page on Meta, and more than 50% in favor. 

I don't think the vote on whether to start the project is the same as
(Continue reading)

Erik Moeller | 3 Dec 03:54 2004
Picon
Picon

Re: Setting up Wikinews languages

Angela-
>> Now that we're about to move demo.wikinews.org to en.wikinews.org, we have
>> to think about a procedure for setting up other language domains.

> I support moving the demo to a URL which makes it clear the project is
> not temporary. However, it is also important to make clear to readers
> that the project is in Beta to avoid responses to the site being
> overly-critical in these early stages. This could be done via a
> beta.wikinews.org URL, but this becomes more complicated once other
> language domains are added, so perhaps a message in the site notice,
> or on the logo, would be more appropriate.

I agree, a Google-like "BETA" in the logo would be sufficient, IMHO.

> I haven't read the German mailing list, but from IRC, I had the
> impression that there were objections to this

Well, there were objections to the English Wikinews as well. The question  
is - do they matter? We're not going to get consensus on any new language  
as some people remain opposed to Wikinews on principle. It seems unfair to  
start Wikinews in English only when there is a substantial number of  
German users who would like to use it now, and when there were many more  
objections by English users than by German ones.

Of all the possible options, waiting for full community consensus until we  
launch a new language seems the least feasible. There should be objective,  
fair criteria for launching a new edition. So from this standpoint, I  
suggest adopting the proposed policy currently on Meta.

I disagree that Wikinews requires a larger user base to be useful. It  
(Continue reading)

Erik Moeller | 3 Dec 09:12 2004
Picon
Picon

Wikinews moved to en.wikinews.org

With Board approval, I have asked Tim Starling to move the project out of  
the demo stage and to en.wikinews.org. As per the earlier suggestion, I've  
added a big red "Beta" notice on the logo (make sure your cache is empty).

I've also revised the proposed review process. It is now clearly optional  
and more like an accelerated Featured Article Candidate procedure.

More on

        http://en.wikinews.org/

Regards,

Erik
wiki_tomos | 3 Dec 09:28 2004
Picon

Re: Wikinews Licensing

----- Original Message -----
From: Jens Ropers <ropers@...>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@...>
Sent: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 01:47:22 +0100
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikinews Licensing

>(1)
>While WP compatibility might seem like a real important and convenient 
>thing, IMHO coming to that conclusion is fallacious (as in [[logical 
>fallacy]]):
>- WP compatibility is pretty much only needed if people want to 
>DUPLICATE (ie. not rewrite) content from the WP.
>- Wikinews was was expressly advertised as a project that would NOT 
>simply duplicate WP content.
>Thus, I believe the "requirement" for WP license compatibility is much 
>less than one might think.

Looking at the Wikinews articles I was involved in so far, it 
seems that taking materials from Wikipedia does not happen much.

If Wikinews articles can be incorporated into Wikipedia article, 
that would be good. I am guessing that the need for Wikinews to 
incorporate Wikipedia articles is quite limited. 

Regarding the license poll, I noticed that the people who expressed 
their opinions are not necessarily the active participants on 
Wikinews so far. I am not sure what to make of it, but I wonder 
if only Wikinews participants will vote on the license issue, or 
any Wikimedian can vote. The former has some intuitive appeal, but 
there aren't that many active participants yet. I think it is okay 
(Continue reading)


Gmane