Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales | 2 Mar 17:42 2005

rules for new wikinews sites

I am of the opinion, based on the (lack of) progress on
fr.wikipedia.org that we need to seriously reassess the "new site"
rules.

First, it needs to be harder to start, and it needs to be demonstrated
that the existing wikipedia community supports it.  This is important
because we want to transmit the values of quality and neutrality to
the new sites.

Second, it needs to be made clear that if a site falls inactive, it
will be closed.

----

Separate issue: the logo *really* needs to say BETA on it, ASAP.  This
is already causing confusion.  People have come to me demanding to
know why I authorized that Wikinews no longer be in beta, but I did
not.  It needs to be in beta for probably 2 years.

--Jimbo

--

-- 
"Pianosa is een Italie" - first words of 50,000th article on nl.wikipedia.org

Erik Moeller | 3 Mar 00:06 2005
Picon
Picon

Re: rules for new wikinews sites

Jimmy-

>First, it needs to be harder to start, and it needs to be demonstrated
>that the existing wikipedia community supports it.
>
I'm currently moving towards supporting a combined requirement approach:

1) 2-3 Wikimedia (not Wikipedia) regulars in that language supporting it
2) certain key documents being created / translated on Meta (mission 
statement, Wikinews-NPOV, FAQ, Main Page etc.)

I'm not sure what you mean with "demonstrated that the existing 
Wikipedia community supports it". Would you like local polls for each 
language? I'd personally not want to use that approach, because I'm 
worried about it leading to a loss of coherence within the Wikimedia 
community over time, just because of some localized statistical 
fluctuations in such polls.

Regardless of what approach we use, it will always be difficult to 
predict the success of a new language edition before it is set up. It 
really depends on the passion and dedication of the handful of people 
who start working on it. A single highly motivated volunteer can run a 
very successful Wikinews edition all by himself. I want to see this 
happening as well, and not put the burden so high that good people will 
be deterred. That's why I think a policy based on people doing work on 
Meta first, rather than on some poll or vote, might lead to better results.

>Second, it needs to be made clear that if a site falls inactive, it
>will be closed.
>  
(Continue reading)

Ilya Haykinson | 3 Mar 01:47 2005
Picon

Re: rules for new wikinews sites

Jimbo,

> As we discussed on IRC, I'd prefer not to deface the logo to do this,
> but to put it in the place where Wikipedia says "From Wikipedia, the
> free encyclopedia". All Wikinewses can edit this at MediaWiki:Tagline.
> On the English one, I'm now changing it to:
> 
>     "Wikinews - the free news source (BETA)"

Instead of "beta" -- which I find very techie and unclear to people
without knowledge of Greek letters -- can we call it a "Project in
Development" or a "Project in Testing"?

-ilya

Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales | 3 Mar 11:43 2005

Re: rules for new wikinews sites

Erik Moeller wrote:
> 1) 2-3 Wikimedia (not Wikipedia) regulars in that language supporting it
> 2) certain key documents being created / translated on Meta (mission 
> statement, Wikinews-NPOV, FAQ, Main Page etc.)

I am not sure that 2-3 people is enough.

> I'm not sure what you mean with "demonstrated that the existing 
> Wikipedia community supports it". Would you like local polls for each 
> language? I'd personally not want to use that approach, because I'm 
> worried about it leading to a loss of coherence within the Wikimedia 
> community over time, just because of some localized statistical 
> fluctuations in such polls.

I'm not sure I follow.  I think there's a much greater risk of loss of
coherence if we let 2-3 people make the decision rather than if we
track a broader consensus of the community with a localized poll.

> Regardless of what approach we use, it will always be difficult to 
> predict the success of a new language edition before it is set up. It 
> really depends on the passion and dedication of the handful of people 
> who start working on it. A single highly motivated volunteer can run a 
> very successful Wikinews edition all by himself.

I think this last bit is what is not true.  Wikinews differs from
Wikipedia in that news is constantly changing, whereas encyclopedia
articles are timeless.  If a single highly motivated volunteer writes
100 articles at a rate of 2 per day, then even if no one else joins,
those articles have permanent lasting value whenever more people do
come along.  With an encyclopedia, laying down a base of work is
(Continue reading)

Dariusz Siedlecki | 3 Mar 14:30 2005
Picon

Re: rules for new wikinews sites

Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

> I am not sure that 2-3 people is enough.

Actually, this could be enough, if the site would launch as a beta. In
my opinion, a beta version of Wikinews doesn't need so much
Wikip(m)edians - just look at pl.Wikinews. We're slowing down, but we
had the most number of people who wanted to work on this project (from
the three Wikinews sites launched lately). This could be due to number
of reasons, but anyway - if we want to have Wikinews in a beta stage,
2-3 people is enough. If we want to start with a full-fledged news
service, we need way more people - 10 may be enough.

As for the local poll, it wouldn't be good, in my opinion. Many people
would want this project to be made, but only a few of them would
contribute.

--

-- 
Darek [Datrio] Siedlecki

David Speakman | 3 Mar 17:20 2005

RE: rules for new wikinews sites

Erik Moeller wrote:
> 1) 2-3 Wikimedia (not Wikipedia) regulars in that language supporting 
> it
> 2) certain key documents being created / translated on Meta (mission 
> statement, Wikinews-NPOV, FAQ, Main Page etc.)

Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales:
I am not sure that 2-3 people is enough.

_______________________________

David:
Maybe we when a new Wikinews is formed, we should send a one-time invite
to all the admins of that language's Wikipedia to come in and help out.

--
David Speakman
http://www.DavidSpeakman.com
501 Moorpark Way #83
Mountain View CA 94041
Phone: 408-382-1459

Erik Moeller | 4 Mar 19:38 2005
Picon
Picon

Re: rules for new wikinews sites

Jimmy-

>>I'm not sure what you mean with "demonstrated that the existing 
>>Wikipedia community supports it". Would you like local polls for each 
>>language? I'd personally not want to use that approach, because I'm 
>>worried about it leading to a loss of coherence within the Wikimedia 
>>community over time, just because of some localized statistical 
>>fluctuations in such polls.
>>    
>>
>
>I'm not sure I follow.  I think there's a much greater risk of loss of
>coherence if we let 2-3 people make the decision rather than if we
>track a broader consensus of the community with a localized poll.
>
>  
>
2-3 people? There was a global vote from October 22 to November 12 in 
which people from most, if not all, major languages participated. That 
sample size is much, much larger than any individual language community 
poll. There was a demo site. The project has been approved by the Board 
of Trustees. 10 language editions have been launched. To have future 
editions meet another test, namely a local community poll, seems like an 
unfair increase of the burden of proof for those language communities.

I have always said that, if there are reasons specific to a language 
community why the project shouldn't be launched, then these reasons 
should be carefully addressed. This is what I tried to do with the 
Wikinews China poll. But I really don't see why we need to question 
again and again and again whether Wikinews should exist at all, and I 
(Continue reading)

Erik Moeller | 8 Mar 21:21 2005
Picon
Picon

Wikinews story featured on news.google.com

Wikinews stories are copied regularly by a site called:

    http://www.theworldforum.org/

According to the operator of the site, Drog, his copy of this Wikinews 
story has been featured on the frontpage of news.google.com for "most of 
the day" and received over 2000 hits:

    
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/CIA_sending_suspects_overseas_for_%22rendition%22

    Drog's comment: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=141759&cid=11878204

Note that Wikinews itself is not yet part of news.google.com due in part 
to the somewhat unpredictable nature of wikis. So we are only indexed 
indirectly through "snapshot" sites like theworldforum.org. Still, I 
think a Wikinews story being listed alongside articles from Reuters and 
the BBC is a major accomplishment. Kudos to everyone involved in writing 
the article.

All best,

Erik

Erik Moeller | 8 Mar 22:46 2005
Picon
Picon

Wikinews "Iron Man" Writing Contest

Inspired by this web comic contest:

http://crowncommission.com/dailygrind/

I've created a Wikinews writing contest. The rules, in a nutshell: You 
have to write at least one story a day. You fail to meet the 
requirement, you drop out. The last man standing wins the contest 
(apologies for non-gender-neutral language).

As with other contests, there is an open "prize bin" that everyone can 
contribute to -- whether it's cash or goods.

If you would like to participate in the contest, please register at:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Writing_contest

You should register before March 21 -- people who register after that 
date will have to write more stories to "catch up".

The main goal of this contest is to increase the daily story output of 
the English Wikinews. If it works out, the idea could be copied by other 
editions as well, but since English is currently the main source of 
translations, any positive change here helps a lot.

As an incentive for people to donate physical prizes, I think it would 
be a good idea if the Wikimedia Foundation could cover shipping costs 
for sending goods to the winner, within reasonable limits. Is that possible?

All best,

(Continue reading)

Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales | 9 Mar 17:16 2005

Re: To stop using Wiki Commons as our default Wikinews image source

I am sympathetic to this, but I think that there needs to be a fairly
tight policy.  As an example, we really can't take a photo from
Reuters and claim fair use -- our use is too similar to theirs,
competes with theirs, etc.

I think it's worth discussing at length so we can get our heads clear
about what the exact bounds should be.  Commons-only is very safe for
now, but your point is valid of course.

David Speakman wrote:

> C&P from the Wikinews watercooler:
> 
> 
> I officially propose that we institute an "Image:" upload capability
> into the Wikinews area and drop the use of Wiki Commons as our default
> image upload site and article image server since it will harm the depth
> of our news coverage. The use of Wiki Commons as our image source will
> hamper us since [[w:fair use]] images are not allowed there. It is my
> belief that news sometimes needs fair use graphics -- case in point: the
> "Wells Fargo and Barclay's rumoured to be in merger talks" article in
> which I inserted a Wells Fargo and Barclays logo - which visually helps
> the story. But since we use Wiki Commons for our image source, this
> graphic will most likely be deleted, leaving the story text-only. --
> Davodd | Talk 10:13, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
> 
> 
> --
> David Speakman
> http://www.DavidSpeakman.com
(Continue reading)


Gmane