Wikinews:Water cooler/miscellaneous

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search



Content is Lacking[edit]

I find that the content is very lacking, and the news s often outdated. I feel that this feels more like a beta or test then a true site. I ask that all users do as I will attempt to do; write as many article as possible. AKA Casey Rollins (talk)Casey Talk with Casey 18th November, 2014. 11:26 AM EST

Recognition of Prior Learning[edit]

Some may have noted that – from the end of July this year – I have started study at the University of the Sunshine Coast. I have requested what us known as Recognition of Prior Learning from the university for two units based off of Wikinews articles I have written. I'll keep everyone posted. --RockerballAustralia contribs 09:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Still waiting. Granted Monday was a public holiday. --RockerballAustralia contribs 08:29, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Fingers crossed for you on that one, I see no reason why peer-reviewed contributions to Wikinews should not be considered a valid learning experience and be credited. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
What I submitted for RPL (this and this) was "not at the level required or meet the requirements of the courses requested." (Email at 12:33pm my time, 2:33am UTC)
I didn't receive any feedback from that. So, I'll pitch for feedback here. Thoughts, anyone? --RockerballAustralia contribs 06:27, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-41[edit]

06:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikinewsie Group[edit]

Anyone seen this? Thoughts?--RockerballAustralia contribs 02:14, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I heard some pretty dark things about what was going on in the early months of this year. Like, word from On High that the way to get along with the Powers That Be was to throw en.wn under the bus. Which, as I've remarked to Laura on multiple occasions, is a guaranteed way to not end up with a Wikinewsie Group that stands for journalism with integrity; you literally can't establish a precedent for integrity by allowing people with divergent goals from yours to coerce you into repudiating your principles at the outset. The last time I recall we talked with Laura about any of that, brianmc was more diplomatic with her than I was, and BRS did this. There was some serious question whether Laura had any legitimacy for her actions by that point; as best I could tell, she seemed to be simultaneously using her putative role as chair of the interim board of TWG, and claiming she didn't have to consult with the interim board because TWG no longer existed.
I did receive a comment from SJ last month on meta, in defense of the board's position, and I replied, too, with a critique of some of the points claimed, but unsurprisingly didn't hear back again. This was after the superprotect thing hit the fan, in which, essentially, the Foundation treated Wikipedia with a similar level of contempt to the way they've treated Wikinews for many years. (And, gasp, Wikipedia didn't like it.) I don't think the board has any credibility at this point to support a claim that they mean well. --Pi zero (talk) 03:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Seen, yes. Thoughts? Well, ... yes, a few. Not many of them bear repeating.
Apparently, sitting back and letting Laura spearhead the push on this allowed them to assume TWG didn't have widespread support from those active here longer-term. That seemed to suit the board quite well; because, they not only declined to recognise TWG (per AffComm recommendation) it allowed them to suggest we set up anyway — do what they imagine we're supposed to be doing — and, maybe get a pat on the head 12 months down the line. Wikinews' independence relies on contributors being independent of the Board's opinions on pretty-much everything. ;) I agreed with Laura that a user group was inappropriate; it smacks of "small geographic coverage", which isn't in-line with the user population here. As and when, it suits I intend to keep working with WM-UK and/or WM-DE.
Whither TWG? Gawd only knows. --Brian McNeil / talk 06:35, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-42[edit]

08:53, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-43[edit]

13:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-44[edit]

05:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

In A Lot of Ways...[edit]

...this applies to us! But, make sure you read the WHOLE article. --Bddpaux (talk) 19:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

It's certainly relevant. Seems like we're neither fish nor fowl; we're trying to provide —without charge and without pay— a service to society that is vanishing as the old economy drops out from under it. --Pi zero (talk) 21:16, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Style guide[edit]

I've produced a typeset version of the style guide using LaTeX with the idea that a nice printable version would be useful to somebody. See File:Wikinews Style Guide 2.pdf. While making it, I corrected a few typos/grammar errors on wiki I spotted, or clarified some wording. The text of the document is nearly verbatim, with some minor typographical differences (punctuation inside quotation marks; consistently italicize Wikinews) and few wording differences (since this is more a "book" format). I did add somewhat of a preface, but it is mostly information about the document itself and the introductory sections of the guide. If you have any suggestions/comments, feel free to let me know. Admittedly, it's not exactly the most useful thing, but I was partly doing this as a way to teach myself a bit more LaTex. —Mikemoral♪♫ 08:31, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I copyedited the SG a bit following your copyedits. It particularly caught my eye, when looking over the things you'd been neatifying, that {{dateline}} is currently strongly discouraged because the review gadget doesn't handle it correctly. --Pi zero (talk) 12:57, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
@Mikemoral: This is great: I know it will help me as I plan on getting into citizen journalism here. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:55, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
  • I like, but note that the George Orwell quote in the first section is slightly mangled. It needs each of the elipsis bracketed (thus: "[...]") because they're representing omitted parts of the longer text (my selective editing there).
The essay it's culled from predates 1984 by a couple of years, the idea that control of language could be an incredibly powerful tool of oppression goes on to become the Ministry of Truth. Imagine an oppressive regime capable of removing, altering the definition of, or otherwise corrupting, the key terms required to discuss a specific idea; the oppressed lose the ability to discuss, or even think about, concepts which might threaten the regime.
The idea that choice of words can direct how people think long-predates Orwell. Journalists are supposed to have sufficient mastery of language to, at the very least, be able to nudge people towards a chosen conclusion. Saying: "The pen is mightier than the sword" simply doesn't do justice to the underlying concept. The point of the selective quote? To encourage those who read it to realise they do have some control over language, but that it is a power which the Forth Estate does not have exclusive control over. To give an example, I'd point people to elements within the First Estate (the clergy/church) who have manipulated the public perception of the word "theory" into a derogatory anti-science term. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
  • I've made a couple of changes to the document. I've changed it to include Pi zero's new changes and Brian's suggestion about the ellipses. I've posted the code on GitHub for anyone to review/edit. The code is a bit messy since making it produce a PDF was more important than neat code, but I'll get around to making it neater. I'll also try to put the PDF output on GitHub so it won't be necessary to upload to Wikinews/Commons every time I (or someone else) make a change. I put it in using the website interface rather than using git, and as far as I can tell, you can only add text-based documents via the website.
@Koavf: Thanks! I was hoping it would be useful to somebody. :) —Mikemoral♪♫ 09:11, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-45[edit]

17:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-46[edit]

15:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Captain Dopey[edit]

As we approach the holidays (speaking as a 'Yank)....I often get kind of nostalgic and feel kinda lame and dopey....but this year, I've decided to channel my energies toward expressing thanks and gratitude! So, while it's still a wee bit early I just wanted to say THANKS! too all my fellow Wikinewsies here! Admins, reviewers and certainly any and all who report on all sorts of stuff happening around the world, what you do and what the project does is sincerely, a good thing! I heard this recently and I liked it: 'On the internet, everyone yells at the same volume!' Given that, I like that we adhere to solid editorial standards and don't just crank out 'churnalism' (God, I love that word!) Keep up the good work....each and every one of you! --Bddpaux (talk) 16:51, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-47[edit]

18:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-48[edit]

19:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)