Wikinews:Water cooler/miscellaneous/Archive/14

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

Google news/community mirror[edit]

Google news has been unwilling to index us because we have no editorial approval process and concerns over vandalism. The do however include several of our mirrors. It has been proposed several times that we create a community run mirror, however each attempt at this has failed due to how much work manually copying each article is. I wrote a script that will copy an article on click and easily report the status of the article (is stored revision the latest) and prompt user to update if needed. It takes only a few seconds to update and should take care of most of Google's concerns. You can see the public side at http://thenewswiki.com/ and Wikinews admins can try the copy part by creating an account at http://thenewswiki.com/adduser.php (or anyone else can e-mail me) and logging in at http://thenewswiki.com/login.php While not yet coded if we decided to use it this could allow us to also have full text rss feeds and other stuff like that. If anyone can come up with a better name let me know, it is using an old name from the project I was going to start before I found Wikinews. --Cspurrier 19:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Craig,
This is fantastic news, I already tried it, it's incredibly easy. Question: is the "Dif"-function a comparison between the version on TheNewsWiki and the current Wikinews version, or just the latest diff on Wikinews? An article summary in RSS would be even better. I think the title is ok, maybe we should have a link to this site over there?
We probably need some rules to use the site: should we update articles if they have a single source-tag, for example? I believe we shouldn't. And a "back"-button on the move articles would also come in handy. Furthermore, do you think it would be possible to have a "remove" button for stories that get deleted here on Wikinews?
--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The diff is between the rev saved in the DB and the current Wikinews version. I am willing to accept most any rules the community wants for it, so if the community approves of this we can come up with some rules. Back will be added as sooon as I get a chance to work on the code again (I hope this weekend). Adding some sort of delete feature is very high priority and will be added asap. --Cspurrier 02:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
PS: some characters might cause problems, such as Bathurst, NSW: Police find bones, "may belong to missing woman", which is being displayed at the bottom of thenewswiki with "& q u o t ;". --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Will fix, in this case it is converting html chars when it is not needed, should be quick fix. --Cspurrier 02:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think if we want to convince Google News, we'll need to work out some kind of 'editorial policy' (when I asked the last time, they responded that they "can't accept news sources without a formal editorial policy"). This should be very strict imho. We should have a clear set of rules when to upload stories from Wikinews. I suggest that before uploading or updating we check:
  • the sources to confirm again, including a search for copyright violations
  • the edit history for vandalism
  • spelling, grammar, ...
  • no dispute tags or single sources, even if it is breaking news
  • the talk and comments page for any concerns
Also, I think to give Google News the impression that we are kinda strict, we should who has access to upload stories and how we decide to give these people access. The site should be developed further, so it looks more like a traditional news site. And I think we should give them the impression that Craig is the leader of this project and as such the de facto editor-in-chief; not that it would mean anything to us, but I think this will substantially increase our odds of getting us listed on Google News.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We could adapt the historical editorial policy we used to have at wikinews. Spelling and grammar could also be semi-automated (always a good idea to double check though). CSpurrier being editor-in-chief for the mirror sounds fine to me (After all it is his mirror), as for being newsie like, I could help with the (x)html/css/(to a limited extent)php/whatever if you want. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some more thoughts:

  • The bottom date says December 31.
  • What happens to older stories? They should be kept available on the site, if we want to link them from Google News we need to be able to archive them.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 09:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I finally had some time to work on it. The December 31 bug has been fixed as has the encoding issues. A remove feature has been added and archives are now in place. Since the response to it so far appears to be positive, :) I have created it its own page.--Cspurrier 20:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Craig, this is a great tool. Kudos on putting it together. I will try to pass the word to Eloquence who may have contacts at Google, still. -- IlyaHaykinson 10:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary Words in the News[edit]

Hi Newsies, this is a heads-up from Wiktionary, to let you know we are linking to Wikinews on our Words In The News page. Whenever a topical or kinda-interesting word pops up in a Wikinews story, we link it to the corresponding article here, and (if necessary) add a definition for that wor. --Keene 22:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's great for Wikinews. Mabie we could create a "Words In The News" page here, select a word from a recent article, and link it back to the Wiktionary definition? —FellowWikiNewsie 20:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know if a page would be useful, but certainly a link on the article, and working together with Wiktionary would help.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I linked back to wiktionary in the McJob article which was about a word. That seemed fitting at least. --SVTCobra 22:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is cool . We also occasionally do inline links for uncommon words too. I'm not oposed to a Words In The News, problem is where would we put it. The main page is too stuffed as it is. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If that problem continues we could set up a second page, also with the News in pictures, which BrianNZ continues to oppose. (see other water cooler discussion).--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since it would only be fair to link back to Wiktionary, is a little Wikt: logo linkable to the word's entry there. This could be an interesting addition to the points system for a writing contest. It's great wiktionary is helping drive traffic to our articles, go forth and expand thy vocabulary! Give them as many excuses as possible to link to us. ;-) --Brian McNeil / talk 09:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Content of Wikinewsreports blog[edit]

Wikinews reports

User:DragonFire1024 posted 2 stories on the blog that are different from the previous blog postings, which were more related to Wikinewsies doing OR. I think we should use http://thenewswiki.com as a way of getting articles onto Google News (and possibly Digg in the future), and only use the Wikinewsreports blog for community aspects of our site, such as Original reporting, because these stories are read through http://en.planet.wikimedia.org => we don't want Wikipedia to start posting featured articles, do we?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the 2 articles should be deleted. Furthermore, I would like to point out that if you add images from a url, they tend to appear in their original size on Planet Wikimedia. Therefore it's better to download the image, resize it (to like 3-400px) and then upload it to your post. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zamimum knows how to remove them, ask him. —FellowWikiNewsie 16:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well sorry...but I was under the impression that it was for Any wikinews article. If not then remove the ones I added. I am not understanding what the purpose of Wikinews Reports is then. If not to get on google news, then what for? DragonFire1024 20:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well My intentions were to get the Wikinews Reports blog into Google News. I e-mailed the request and got a reply saying:

Thank you for your note. We've reviewed your site and will be adding it to our index for Google News. You should be able to find your articles in Google News within a few weeks. DragonFire1024 03:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The blog was started at the time Planet Wikimedia started up, and the point is to have a blog about Wikinews so we can promote Wikinews and our stories on Planet Wikimedia and other blog aggregators. If we are going for Google News, we should use http://thenewswiki.com , which will be a much better way to get all our stories on Google News. I hope you can send an email to Google to ask them to add The News Wiki instead of our blog. I certainly would like the ideas of other editors here about what we should use the blog for.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 08:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot add craigs new thing until it works properly and has something more than just a list of articles. And no where does it state on that blog that it has anything to do with just original reporting diaries etc. I was simply trying to do Wikinews a favor by increasing readership, which is my biggest concern over a journal. If I had known that it was just for that, I would not have asked to be added. I am not interested in telling my POV of a story I wrote. I am interested in someone reading the article for the facts of what happened. DragonFire1024 08:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to apologize, I know your intentions were good, and I share your concern to boost readership. You're right that the blog doesn't explain what it's for, exactly the reason why I would like others to join in on the discussion, so we can decide if it is a good idea or not. But I think it would be a bad idea since the posts are listed on Planet Wikimedia, and that kind of content doesn't make any sense there. For the record, the other posts on the blog don't tell a certain POV of a story either: they are meant to explain the goings-on on Wikinews, like the other bloggers on Planet Wikimedia do on their blogs.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 09:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If this is all just a trick to get Doogle <sp?> to index wikinews reports then the exercise is not worth pursuing. -Edbrown05 08:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Google wants stable versions, if you give them what you want, they will not get the current and best that this site has to offer. Who is right and who is wrong here. Give in to Doggle? Is there any way to address that? -Edbrown05 09:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had said on IRC that the blog was for the behind the scenes stuff. And thats fine. Personally, I still would like the wikinews.blogspot.com used, it has a real wikinews skin, that is missing on WNreports Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 08:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly I don't see the problem with adding a few stories here and there...Google will pick up on it and I was only planning on adding an article or two every so often. But we still need people willing to write regardless of what blog we use. DragonFire1024 09:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To Dragonfire: The problem is that those posts are read by people on en.planet.wikimedia.org and other aggregators, who really don't have a need for such posts. I don't see why Google News should pick up on our blog, if we are posting our behind-the-scenes there, and if we have a perfectly good alternative for Google News already, The NewsWiki.
To BrianNZ: If wikinews.blogspot.com has the skin, than it has to be possible to transfer it to wikinewsreports.blogspot.com , no? I don't know who has access to the wikinews blog, but if you can copy the template for the blog we could paste it into the wikinewsreports blog.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 11:47, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Commentthis[edit]

I understand that some of you want to "make promotion" for the tabs "add opinions" and "view opinions", but I think that, as it looks now, Template:Commentthis is very ugly.

For example, floating template should make disturbance with another template, as in Italy: protest for ice-cream in Senate.

I think it would be more 'discrete' to have a template without any background-color, without any floating property, added at the bottom of the page. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 12:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grants available for local news tech[edit]

Verbatim from the Knight News Challenge:

In 2007, Knight Foundation will again award $5 million in grants to individuals, organizations or businesses with ideas and projects that will transform community news. Anybody, anywhere in the world is eligible for funding — if the project meets all of the following criteria:

1. Use digital media. 2. Involve new forms of news in the public interest. 3. Focus on specific geographic community.

This site will begin accepting applications on July 1, 2007.

Maurreen 17:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See also our previous attempt: Wikinews:Knight Foundation proposal Bawolff ☺☻ 18:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Folks, just as a heads-up, we will be meeting with folks from the Knight Foundation next week. I don't have further details, but will update interested parties if there's any update. Feel free to email me if you have questions. -- IlyaHaykinson 10:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blog CC-BY-2.5?[edit]

Anyone oppose WikinewsReports.Blogspot.com being available as CC-BY-2.5? Someone posted recently, using a bit of the article they wrote, and put a disclaimer on it saying "some of this blog post is from Wikinews", something like that. It would be a lot better if we just make every post the same free license as Wikinews itself. -- Zanimum 18:02, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not. My personal blog is under the CC Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. --Nzgabriel | Talk 10:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I had already added a cc-by-2.5 license note at the bottom of the blog. I've copied that notice to the sidebar.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:26, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania[edit]

Looks like Cspurrier and Messedrocker are going to Taiwan... what are we going to ask them to do for Wikinews? At least take some pictures and report on the goings-on, maybe interview some Wikimedia celebrities? Harass some of the Board members to help Wikinews with some of it's problems, like getting an email address for accredited reporters? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The last point is something that would be really good to have. I wonder if we could actually partner with the Wikipedia Weekly podcast, as they're planning to do a lot of interviews, I hear. -- Zanimum 20:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Best ask in advance, maybe they'll agree to dually license their stuff on Commons. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If we're trying to harass board members, now is the best time due to the election. Bawolff ☺☻ 21:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Brianmc and myself have been doing so over on the candidate questions.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have applied for a press pass and will do my best to cover Wikimania. I will also be doing a BOF on Wikinews, it would be great if some Wikinewsies could attend. --Cspurrier 23:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Messedrocker maybe... what's a BOF?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Birds-of-a-Feather (BoF) (45-60 minute informal meetup of group discussion on a particular topic)"--Cspurrier 22:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I also do work in Wikipedia Weekly. Not only could I be the liaison from Wikinews to Wikipedia Weekly, but I could probably do more than that! →MR 03:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


let's create link to Wikipedia[edit]

I was looking at the news today, and found myself trying to click on several 'blue' words. But they only search Wikinews, which makes sense.

Why not have a link on the Main Page to facilitate checking Wikipedia?

Katydidn't 18:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)katydidn't[reply]

If you poke around some more, you might notice that in the articles 'blue words' as you call them, link to Wikinews for things like countries and people in the news. Other 'blue words' link directly to articles in Wikipedia. If you look closely, you'll notice the two kinds, local links and interwiki links, have a slightly different shade of blue. Also, at the bottom of the Main Page there are links to all of Wikinews' main sister projects. If you meant something else, please elaborate. Thanks, --SVTCobra 18:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
Wikipedia has more about this subject:
On the pages which we link to locally, should be a box like the one at the side, which links to a wikipedia article. Bawolff ☺☻ 21:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Benoit confession on Digg.com[edit]

I did not add this to digg.com and not sure who did. But if you are signed up there, or want to be, then add your digg to the article :) DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 07:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

London/Glasgow Car Bombings[edit]

Ok so you've probably seen the news, here, here and here Anyway does anyone else feel that an article should be writen seperatly for both event which occurred with more information - such as the fact that both these incidents are linked and should the article contain up to date information on the investigation into both attacks?

The NYT on Wikinews[edit]

So indistinct has the line between past and present become that Wikipedia has inadvertently all but strangled one of its sister projects, the three-year-old Wikinews — one of several Wikimedia Foundation offshoots (Wikibooks, Wikiquote, Wiktionary) founded on the principle of collaboratively produced content available free. Wikinews, though nominally covering not just major stories but news of all sorts, has sunk into a kind of torpor; lately it generates just 8 to 10 articles a day on a grab bag of topics that happen to capture the interest of its fewer than 26,000 users worldwide, from bird flu to the Miss Universe pageant to Vanuatu’s ban on cookie imports from neighboring Fiji. On bigger stories there’s just no point in competing with the ruthless purview of the encyclopedia, which now accounts for a staggering one out of every 200 page views on the entire Internet.

All the News That’s Fit to Print Out –Doldrums(talk) 03:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The premise of the linked to article by Doldrums, written by novelist Jonathan Dee and published by the New York Times is fucked up. Wikipedia does not do news, that news is done by 'other' journalists. Sadly, Wikinews is not doing news. Therefore this project suffers. It must do Original reporting, it is its mandate, otherwise, contributions amount to: get the fuck off this planet. -Edbrown05 10:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some brass by writers/contributors and a receptive attitude by administrators seems perhaps almost hopeless (We want sources). Give it up, you ain't gonna get it in Original reporting, the best you get is notes, and the best you get beyond that no notes. Either you want to report it or you don't. "Nobody believes anything you say"... that is the weakness at this point when nobody believes anybody because they refuse to believe them in the first place. Original reporting cannot be performed until the community comes to accept new users, insist on notes ( I guess) and accept on good faith that the report is respectable. Later, if a a report proves not true, deal with it then. Blocking now is the wrong time, blocking for a demonstratable acts of ill-faith is the right time. -Edbrown05 11:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem at Wikinews is that it doesn't trust people who use the Internet. That in itself says a lot. This site cannot work unless responsible news is posted. There is a way to weed out the right from the wrong. If you report here, develop a track record of reports that recieve no factual opposition. Blow your reputation by misrepresentation, that speaks for itself. -Edbrown05 11:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the Globe and Mail yesterday:

Ms. Gardner, who worked as a journalist in Canada for 10 years, recalled turning to Wikinews to keep abreast of developments in the Virginia Tech shooting on April 16 of this year while working for CBC.ca. "It actually was the first place that I went online because I knew that Wikinews, in effect, aggregates together multiple sources," said Ms. Gardner, who began working at the Florida-based Wikimedia Foundation on Monday.

Okay so admittedly she would be biased, since she works for the Foundation, but it shows that in some cases we get it right. Why would journalists from the MSM come here to read our stuff? To either rip it off outright, as we have seen, or lift ideas and facts from it. I've seen this a few times and wondered why stories come into the MSM a day or two after we've done something. I am guessing that the NYT person is just pissed that we don't output enough stories, which leaves him little to pick from. I agree with your preference for original reporting Ed, but I think we need to provide both (original and aggregate). We just need to provide more. It seems to me that the only complaint the NYT person had was our output of "just 8 to 10 articles a day". He's right. We need 50 to 100 articles a day, where the more regional stories could be sorted into their respective categories and the main page reserved for a few prominent international stories and a spotlight for OR. Jcart1534 12:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed Sue Gardner because (1) our mission statement says we are both like an aggregator and an outlet, and (2) because we have OR articles next to our referenced articles.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 12:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
She's very friendly, still trying to find her way around the job... --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was interviewed by Jonathan Dee for this article. I am disappointed with how it came out. It seemed like he had a much more positive view of Wikinews when we were talking, then what ended up in his story. It may be nice if we developed a slightly more press friendly about us page, that I could have quoted or pointed him to. --Cspurrier 15:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that this NYT article was written on the same day that Wikinews was picked up by every major news agency on the planet. In other words, this guy was under a rock before he wrote this. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 15:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the NYT article is spot on in identifying one of the key problems of WN: That people, when there is major breaking news, tend to create and/or expand an WP article rather than a WN one. And instead of shooting the messenger, we should find ways to remedy this problem. --+Deprifry+ 15:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. Won't be easy though, if we look at the ideas of User:Swatjester:

Wikipedia’s morphing into a news source, Rosenthal said, “is an inevitable step. Because the software is absolutely perfectly suited to that. And the rules, I’m sure unintentionally, are perfectly suited to it, with the emphasis on verifying and the neutral point of view.” As for Wikinews, he offered, with brutal kindness, that it was a good place for news that “doesn’t make Wikipedia’s radar.”

I think some of us should take on the job of being more active on Wikipedia, being active on the pages about the news of the day. It shouldn't be too much time consuming if we write up a basic "invitation to help Wikinews" message for Wikipedia talk pages. Also, we should maybe have some promotion for the writing contest: I've seen a WikiProject that uses banner advertisements, I'll hop over and take a look. All other suggestions are more than welcome, but there's probably no magical solution -unless a mentality change about sister projects.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think some of us should take on the job of being more active on Wikipedia... What? Hello? This is Wikinews. That is Wikipedia. IMHO, they have no need for a news section and IMHO it is just a way for them to compete with us. They won't even, except in the Chris Benoit article, won't even use Wikinews as a reference.
It shouldn't be too much time consuming if we write up a basic "invitation to help Wikinews" message for Wikipedia talk pages. Good idea, but do you actually think that WIkipedia would go for that? They already have {{Wikinewspar}}, which again IMO I am surprised they even have. After all 90% of the time they get added to a WP article, is because a Wikinewsie adds it.
My point, we are not in competition. WP might think they are in one with us... We should be woring together, but at every turn it seems to me, we get run off the road by them. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 10:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • That article is a bunch of bull and a classic example of the decline of the NYT. But remember folks: there's no such thing as bad publicity. BTW never forget to add the "Wikines has articles relating..." template to WP stories that are hot. I always added it near the top and let someone else move it :-) Dan100 (Talk) 18:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Media files on Wikimedia Commons[edit]

This category contains freely licensed images now available on Commons, the local copy is redundant and should be deleted. I've moved nearly 100 such images to Commons and now there is quite a backlog of files that should be deleted locally. Before any administrator begins doing so, it is probably appropriate that we discuss this issue. This is because DragonFire1024 has expressed his wish that his images should not be deleted locally, saying that "Commons or not, This image, I request as the author, should remain on Wikinews. Please do not delete local upload of this image", however I question the justification for doing so.

I therefore feel it is important before work begins to remove these images and update internal links where appropriate, that the community confirms whether this is the desired approach for freely licensed images and whether we should continue to discourage such uploads locally. Adambro 18:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actions/experiences speak louder than words. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 20:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What actions, what experiences? Without telling us and specifying to what images these relate we cannot understand the basis for your opposition. Adambro 22:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On gov't images, the October Snow storm, hotel images for example...I cannot give specific names. And I am also not going to argue anymore. I made my choice with my work and I am sticking to that choice until I am comfortable with them on Commons. I am, again, not required to upload them there and neither is anyone else. Its not my fault, or anyone elses who upload here, that Wikinews is not intertwined like commons to display those images on all other projects or Wikinews languages. I think, and have said this before, that that should be done. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 22:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Simply saying you don't like Commons because some images were deleted doesn't convince me that these images should be kept locally. You need to provide examples where images have been deleted without justification otherwise there is no weight to the basis of your position. Adambro 12:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Local uploads for me. Commons, unless I misunderstand the place, will remove photos using their pocesses in which they delete photos no longer deemed "worthy". What they are achieving is very good, but it is ultimately an unworkable scheme for all cross-wiki images to reside on that Wikimedia platform. I'll upload my meaningless, but relavent, news story images here. -Edbrown05 10:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - Yes, you do misunderstand. Commons only delete images where there is a problem, such as a lack of source or licence details, or where community consensus decides that the images do not fall within the project scope which is to create a resource of free images that are either used or could be of use to Wikimedia projects. Therefore, any images moved from Wikinews to Commons are not going to be deleted as they are used here. Adambro 19:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As Brian says up-front, Commons has improved a lot - although I do appreciate that DragonFire1024 views them as deletionists and thus not to be extended a lot of trust. I don't share that view, and appreciate having Adambro work to get images transferred and properly sourced to avoid deletion. The perception DF has is of an uncaring group who look for the tiniest error in image sourcing and use it to grind stuff through the deletion process. I know this is pretty far from reality, but Commons does have to try and reestablish themselves as a friend to our project.
DragonFire1024, please extend Adambro some trust - he is working with the best of intentions towards all projects. This may not be immediately obvious to you as one of the more prolific contributors of free images locally uploaded. I do not believe you or your images are being "personally" targeted, there is no conspiracy, and as a FYI the weather graphics have been uploading there without issue for about a week. Just to back over the same road-kill and make sure it is dead... Commons has growed up a bit, they ain't so bad anymore. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - There has been no additional discussion of this for a number of days now. The category contains 97 image which can be deleted and this is only going to increase. Before this category gets out of hand, I suggest some of the Wikinews administrators consider the merit of the arguments regarding this issue and take appropriate action based upon their judgement. Adambro 12:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote[edit]

Dear wikinewsies,

16 users have already voted for the board elections... If you are eligible, please vote because it is the only way to have a say in a democracy! We need your votes if we want a say in the foundation, imho.


--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I voted but through Wikipedia (sorry) Dan100 (Talk) 18:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews mentioned in The Times (Times of London)[edit]

We're (or, more accurately considering my activity levels these days, you're) in The Times (that's in the print edition too btw). Sad that the scoop had to be on such an awful happening. Dan100 (Talk) 18:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't make this stuff up[edit]

Watch for the "Breaking News" line. If we're ever becoming like this, will someone set the servers on fire? --+Deprifry+ 17:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem to realize that this event has become an annual televised tradition. --SVTCobra 08:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinewsie.org[edit]

Okay, as some people know, I bought http://www.wikinewsie.org. I've issued email addresses to all active accredited reporters who have listed an email address.

Now, we obviously need some sort of footer/disclaimer. Suggestions? Oh, and volunteers to set up the web site - we have 500GB on Linux with SQL database support. --Brian McNeil / talk 07:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I am using for now:

Brian Anderton
Independent reporter accredited by Wikinews.
en.wikinews.org

Disclaimer: Accredited Wikinews reporters do not represent the Wikimedia Foundation; they are trusted contributors who the Wikinews community has certified per the Accredited Policy.

Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 09:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:MessedRocker has an FTP account on the server and can upload material to the root. There are up to 4 other FTP accounts can be set up as well as a number of SQL databases. I will investigate the shared calendaring and filestore today. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:48, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very poor quality logo for others to take as an idea...

--Brian McNeil / talk 11:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would happen with it? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The idea is we'll have reporter profiles - which will mainly be autobiographical.
  • Everyone with an email address should have received an email about the shared calendaring system. Feel free to make personal use of this as a way to figure out how to use it - but remember I can see all the calendars. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As i've told Brian NZ, which may have shared it on IRC, I like the logo but it should be remaned to "contacting the reporters. We could also move our Wikinews Reports blog there instead of blogspot. And perhaps incorporate something similar to Google Docs and Spreadsheets to colloborate on current interview requests, etc? --Nzgabriel | Talk 08:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Gabriel, there is supposed to be shared file storage - not totally worked that out yet, still playing with the online calendaring - had to re-send a load of the invites with a comment so people - hopefully - realise it isn't spam.
BrianNZ now has access via FTP and has been playing around with a layout for the site. We do need discussion on this, I've set up one MySQL db for MessedRocker - which leaves us with 9 to play with. I suspect we'll need input from outside the circle of reporters to set the site up really well.
As to "Contact" versus "Contacting", I'm not sure on that. Second opinion anyone? --Brian McNeil / talk 11:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have spammed several equivalent pages on other language Wikinews sites. I don't think any actually have an accreditation process equivalent to ours - and there likely would be headaches setting up contacts to verify things. However, as there are still 60+ email addresses available I believe it is only fair to offer them a chance to use them. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The German Wikinews is the only one to pick up on this so far, ongoing discussion on their equivalent of the Water Cooler. Since they abandoned their accreditation process I suggested anyone wanting an email address go through ours. If they can show good contributions on another language, and get someone who speaks it and we know (think:Eloquence) to vouch for them why shouldn't we locally accredit and issue a press pass? We just insist they translate all their original reporting from German to English. ;-) --Brian McNeil / talk 09:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A focal point is a good thing, a fork is something else altogether. Not sure how something off Wikinews could be considered a focal point. It is a fraction point. The idea is good, the execution is bad, especially when the email service doesn't even work for the function of repsonding to a sender. Off Wiki has been tried and true failures. Wikinews.org, whether or not they will supply emails is the issue to stay on top of. -Edbrown05 10:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Request. I contacted Brianmc about helping with the design of the website and stuff like that and he said that I such get trust from the community. I have designed websites and blogs before. Click Here to see AsherHeimermann.com and Click Here to see LeftWingKid.com. Both sites are owned and updated by myself. AsherHeimermann.com took me awhile to design. I provide my services free of charge to personal and non-profit groups, like Wikinews. So, may I please volunteer to help Wikinewsie.org? it would be an honor. Asher Heimermann|Talk 01:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If Brian oversees your work, no problem with helping to design the site. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would it was that e-z. Already there was an email that was sent out making me look like a fool. Brian, what do you think? Asher Heimermann|Talk 11:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you need to chill a bit, I appreciate the offer - to make the project work we're going to need to collect a variety of people to get things going. That - as a community - not everyone agrees with each other is normal. The comment in the email you're taking umbrage at was - to my reading - "I don't know this guy, why him?" Nothing personal intended - just that you've not established trust with the community through contributions.
To keep everyone happy I'll initially set you up on a sub-directory of the site, then people can judge your work and drop the being suspicious. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Should you e-mail me the password, username, and URL so I can get started? 67.36.86.80 19:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Would anyone object if I tried to bug the Foundation about letting us use the Wikinews logo on the site, even though it isn't an official site/project? I think they might give us any exception. -- Zanimum 14:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a main page redesign[edit]

pls review and comment. it's basically an attempt to cleanup layout and reduce clutter a little bit. –Doldrums(talk) 09:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add a box after Wikinews media to give a list of - say - all stories from the last 3 days? Other than that I quite like it. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
you mean this stuff? –Doldrums(talk) 09:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. :) I hit disputed and thought that should be the end of the page. One change I would make is to move the start a story bit further up. --Brian McNeil / talk 07:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How about having the link you gave me above as "Archives" in the header of the page so you can jump to that section? --Brian McNeil / talk 07:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I dislike the order of boxes: disputed stories shouldn't be above our latest stories. The design is very streamlined, maybe we can simply swap those to chunks (the one with the gray and the one with the white background). --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 11:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
? the latest stories (and the leads, of course) are right at the top. the Recent news section merely repeats the latest stories listed at the top, in addition to listing older (and therefore deserving of a lower place in the page) stories. have made the "Contribute to" section prominent to attract readers to do this bit in writing. –Doldrums(talk) 13:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I still feel that the Disputed stories are should be listed, as on the current page, very low, probably just above Wikinews in other languages. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. But there should be a logo or something on the top header. Otherwise a line separating the leads...but its much better than what we have now. I also think we should keep the newspaper background. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 18:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree it's better than the current one. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a little too long...can you try to "compact" it a little? --[[user:Isis|<font color="sky blue">'''Is'''</font>[[user talk:Isis|<font color="gray">'''''is'''''</font>]]]] 18:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok, i've worked on this a bit, couple of the suggestions have been sort of incorporated, couple not. and now there are two versions to choose from.

assuming there is some agreement, am thinking of trying it out for real this weekend, so do let me know. –Doldrums(talk) 16:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm not too keen on having to scroll down to learn about how to contribute and also the same problem regarding other recent articles, they should have more prominence. Adambro 18:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
there are now links to the contribute and recent news sections above the fold. is this enough? the reason i haven't kept the start the article box at the top is i'm trying to keep all the Contribute bits (the start an article box, lists of stories, help and about boxes) together in the hope that this will help users, especially new ones, avoid the usual pitfalls(duplicated stories, press releases, the notnews posts...). –Doldrums(talk) 08:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer version One. Jcart1534 10:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blobs of text look better in the center than "weighing down" one side, i feel. also, there's a certain amount of mix-and-match possible between the versions. –Doldrums(talk) 04:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so as usual this is no longer receiving attention, wait a week more and someone will remove the flag, another week and it will get archived without the makeover... what's the schedule to implement this redesign? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I don't like any three of these -- the colors look too washed out, and the juxtaposition of text looks really odd because there's no sort of defined boundary or anything like that, even if subtle. MessedRocker (talk) 11:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we should take a new approach to redesigning. Currently we're having someone make a design, then everyone debatees about it, and no one really ever agrees. How about we have a big massive debate about what the ideal design should look like, with photoshopped images so we all know exactly what our collective dream frontpage looks like and agree it'd be pretty, and then we work on implementing it. A little bit like what happened with Wikinews:Custom skin/ m:Wikinews_design_contest#.22Wikinews.22_2. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

changes[edit]

what do people think of these changes - removing the synopsis from second and third lead, and a "Feature" box that can be used in many ways? the result looks like so. –Doldrums(talk) 10:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Designs[edit]

  1. One - Doldrums
  2. Two - Doldrums
  3. like so - Doldrums

New Proposals[edit]

  1. Another version - MartiniMan

- Let's hear some thoughts on this design.

Version 2[edit]

- What do you think? MartiniMan 21:14, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like it, but un-center the ticker. It looks really jumpy like that on slow computers. TheFearow 23:30, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Does that look better? MartiniMan 00:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This actually looks a lot better than some of the other ones. However, the lead story should be centered a bit more. MessedRocker (talk) 00:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I love it! TheFearow 01:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

XY10[edit]

Introducing Design XY10 by Messedrocker. Ergonomically designed to pack news together. MessedRocker (talk) 11:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the current design[edit]

I think the current design is fine as it is. We don't need a major revamp, we can make small edits to the main page when necessary (like I did a few minutes ago). MessedRocker (talk) 12:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--No, I think we need to make main headlines clearer, instead of having them all in one list. It'll look more professional and the site more usuable as a news source. 85.210.172.87 15:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No title[edit]

What is the code that make it so Main Page, From Wikinews, the free news source that you can write! not come up? --Nzgabriel | Talk 11:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's some Javascript code in MediaWiki:monobook.js that does it. -- IlyaHaykinson 03:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can also do it in css I belive. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews revamp[edit]

{{flag}} {{poll}} Hey everyone! As most of you know / think, there has been much discussion about the home page recently. In all honesty, I think the home page looks really crappy - it is far too long and, is centralized around the editors, rather then the readers. There are huge gaps and nothing is easy to find. The colors are boring and bland. I have thrown together a prototype for what I propose we change the theme of wikinews to and, a prototype home page which can be viewed at *url has been removed by user:symode09

I can understand we need a page which is similar to the water cooler but, with all the vital immediate information so, I set up part of what could be an editors page - http://loopaustralia.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page/Editors

These pages are only conceptual and, graphics would be far snappier and, there would be english content. There are 3 questions I have about my proposal to replace the current theme/home. Feel free to comment. These are only a rough indication so there can be change/refinement before I hold an official vote if it has enough support now Symode09

1) Do you support changing the theme to something similar to the theme provided above?


2) Do you support changing the design of the homepage to something similar to what is provided above?


3) Do you support splitting the editors tools away from the home page and make it more reader orientated?


I have de-flagged this discussion as it is already flagged and being discussed at Wikinews:Water cooler#a_main_page_redesign. No need to have it in two places with essentially the same stuff. However I will say, I do think things like the "new article" box should be there at the top, but the rest of the editors stuff can be moved to the newsroom. Matt | userpage | contribs 20:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yuck. Black is cool until you hit 21. --Brian McNeil / talk 16:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From User:Bawolff/Sandbox/symode based
  • I'm responding here as i don't know which place the discussions at (to repeat what Matt said. duoble-posting is a hassle, please don't). Well I appriciate the effort (and please don't take anything I say here personally, this is all meat to be constructive criticism), I unfortunately must say I think this is worst than the current version. My comments:
    • Black is not a good colour unless you are using lynx, or run a site with a very specific niche that likes black
      • furthermore, the wikinews logo on black is a bad idea. (although a banner like that might be able to work)
    • It has a web 2.0/bloggy look to it, which depending on your perspective might be a good or a bad thing
    • I like the main column subordinated to a side column
    • I like shifting some of the header stuff to bottom
    • Minnor issue: CC-BY-NC-ND logo is not our license (and honestly is one of the absolute worst, horrid licenses out there IMO...)
    • You probably should have signed your post (although I remember that loopAustralia is owned by Symode) (Sorry, I must be blind), and mentioned that this skin is based on guMAX to prevent confusion
    • Question 1 - maybe change theme to this, however the theme would need a lot of work still. I think something like meta:Image:Wikinews silentist suggestion 2.png, or wikinews:Custom skin would be desirable.
    • question 2 - I don't know why, but i do like your version of the main page. I feel we should look into something similiar
    • question 3-The main page is too long winded as it is. I feel we should look into a page for readers (which would be Main Page), and a page for editors (Which would be [[Wikinews:Newsroom).

Happy desiging, Bawolff ☺☻ 01:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      • For the record, I strongly support moving some of the header information to the footer - it makes for a much more "instantly pleasing" presentation - where one doesn't have to ignore a third of the screen. Sherurcij 01:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've read your comments and will revise it on friday. The licence is no problem - that was only there for show and, will be changed for this site. I was going a bit towards the 2.0 look. I understand the problems with black, even though I like it, I think the header is too far. I am going to evolve the page a bit more to reflect the colors and looks of http://www.abc.net.au/news/ - the best news site I know. I was going to add the "start a new article" thing to my version of the front page but, I couldn't work out how to do it :p if you have any more ideas, feel free to hit me (oh, and thanks for the criticism - now I can improve it :D ) Symode09 03:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Look forward to seeing it. By the way, what are your thoughts on this? Bawolff ☺☻ 05:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made a redesign based on your work. Well it still needs work (specificlly on the nav stuff, and the stuff outside main content area), I was wondering what you thought. (See big pict above). Bawolff ☺☻ 21:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fuss affecting reputation[edit]

There has been much change on the main page when it comes to the main story and that sort of thing. I strongly reccomend there be no change to the main page layout until, there is a clear community consensus. This may take a while however, it will not deter users. One of the reasons google was more popular then msn/live search is because msn/live have had so many revamps and changes/rebranding, users are sick of having to learn new systems. Symode09 10:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest recent change is the main lead, and I believe "click the picture" is simple enough not to be a problem for any readers. Prior to that the biggest change was implementation of the collapsed and expandable sections.
Our main page will never change if every redesign effort is put up for a vote, there will always be people who say we need to keep a specific aspect of the current design. What actually ends up happening is people are bold and incorporate an aspect here and there from a new page design proposal. So our main page evolves. It isn't like other sites where they have a total makeover and visitors are initially lost; you can always fall back on basic wiki navigation techniques if you know them.
At the moment one of my gripes is the RSS feed. It needs at least one day dropped off it. The BBC feed lists 29-30 stories, ours is so long that it has scrolling controls. Great, we're writing, but people probably check the feed frequently enough that we could drop a day or two. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Widget Wikinews RSS[edit]

hi, i have no more much time to play with wikinews but (for fun) i made a little MacOSX DashBoard Widget used to read RSS flux.

It's available here : Wikinews RSS.zip

It's a functionnal beta version but not perfect at all (uggly ok, i am not a drawer). i test in english and french.

It connects on rss flux using system language pref, in that case : bs, ca, de, en, es, fr, it, pl.

It's possible to add new languages, but i don't know if others are available.

It's a CeCill v2 licence project a GPL like but valid in France.

i am planning a Gadget for google et Win-doze and iPhone

Jacques Divol 20:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

responded by email. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation in bio[edit]

Helen Slater has a bio on your site which is incorrect. I'm her mother and edited it but my edits were rejected. Helen's grandfather emigrated from Poland and changed his name at Ellis Island from Schlacter to Slater, at the suggestion of his sister Edith who preceded him to America. So Helen and her father both had the birth names Slater, not Schlachter as set forth in your article. Also, my maiden name was Alice Citrin, not Chrin as you have it in the article for Helen. You cite a celebrity source her erroneous name, but I have her birth certificate--she was born in Mid=Island Hospital in Bethpage New York on December 15, 1963. I was there so I really do know her right name. I was also married to her father Gerald Slater in `957, Let me know what other proof you need to make the correction Thanks.

Alice Slater 446 e. 86 St. New York, NY 10028 212-744-2005 aslater@rcn.com

I don't believe it is on our site. You probably meant wikipedia (we are not the same. we're wikinews). I copied this to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Helen_Slater ( a page for discussing the development for the wikipedia article on Helen Slater) where it will probably get more notice. You can also try emailing info-en@wikimedia.org . If the misinformation is on wikinews please provide a URL. Hope that helps. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

scraped by eontarionow[edit]

I don't know where to report this, or if this is so commonplace as to not deserve reporting, but I just noticed this mini-article, mostly copied from Wikinews, at http://www.eontarionow.com/us/2007/07/27/two-news-helicopters-crash-in-phoenix-arizona/ :

Phoenix - Two news helicopters have crashed in Phoenix, Arizona, in the United States. The helicopters were covering a high-speed chase within the city, when, at some point, the two choppers inadvertently crashed into each other. Wikinews has learned that the two helicopters belong to independent TV station KTVK, and ABC affiliate KNXV, respectively.
“It was surreal, it was like watching a movie,” Chris Miller, a central Phoenix business operator, told 12 News.
Police and firefighters are now on the scene. A nearby school has been closed as well.
There is still no word on an exact cause of the collision or if there are any survivors.

Needless to say, this is taken almost directly from Two news helicopters crash in Phoenix, Arizona, specificially, somewhere between this revision and this one. —Scs 12:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left a polite note on their comments section, hopefully in future they'll credit properly. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like they deleted your comment Brian. And still no credit by the looks of it. --Meekel 11:53, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This same issue was brought to the attention of [Eloquence] back in June, for the site eCanadaNow. Not sure what came of it. I had a quick look at eCanadaNow's main page and didn't see any Wikinews articles, so perhaps they received a warning from WMF's legal counsel? Jcart1534 15:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I put a note regarding the eOntarioNow issue on Eloquence's talk page. Jcart1534 00:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will do the design for Wikinewsie.org[edit]

And I have an idea for how it will look. I believe that since it's directly related to Wikinews, we (meaning I) should do what it takes to get permission to use the Wikinews logo. →MR 07:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to an OTRS agent, seeing as this is a website directly related to Wikinews with non-commercial intent, there's basically no reason why they would deny us permission to use the logo. As soon as permission is granted, I'll get started designing the website. →MR 11:48, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Messed. My design that's up atm is just temp anyway, untill we found someone with the skills ;) Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 12:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since TheNewsWiki was rejected by Google News for showing no signs of being anything more than a news aggregator with no sign of a community behind it, I think we should run the script on wikinewsie.org . At least then we can show there is a community behind it.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 14:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WordPress is installed on the Wikinewsie.org domain, if anyone wants an account - or if we need an account for a bot let me know. My sort-of gut feeling on use of the Wikinews logo is that every instance should link to Wikinews.
I'd like to see a sort-of merge between the 5 minute job logo I did and the official one so that the map becomes the centre of the @ symbol. Colours I don't care about, but it requires consistency on the blog as well.
Oh, and I just paid the bill on this, domain and hosting is 2 years - everything else 5. I'll extend the domain later on, but godaddy are pretty good on reminders anyway.
Finally, a reminder we have shared calendaring on the domain. Yes, the emails for it look spammy - but pay attention and sign up. Stick in your birthday once you've signed up and - if nothing else - we can laugh at each other getting older. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's mainly you who's getting older, no? :-p :-p --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I ended up - under the influence of Jupiler - committing to send DragonFire1024 some real Belgian beer for his birthday. I think one of the 4 packs of Duvel with 2 glasses is under 20 euros. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to rant on this subject somewhat... It is un-effing-believable how difficult it is to get Belgian beer shipped to the U.S. Duvel's website doesn't ship any alcohol to the U.S. - and I hadn't looked into that until recently. I did find one site that shipped, but - get this - they wanted 200 Euro for the shipping of 4 Duvel bottles and 2 glasses. So... I'm trying to figure out where I can buy a Duvel gift pack and a bunch of polystyrene packing and I'll visit the post office. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Press[edit]

Are Wikinews journalists the press? Jet123 04:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a small part of the press, a small part that is not recognized often but is part of the press nonetheless. MessedRocker (talk) 00:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, there is no real "press". The press is free. Everyone (including citizen websites like Wikinews) can be a part of it. —FellowWiki Newsie 00:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinewsie.org redesign[edit]

So what do you think? MessedRocker (talk) 14:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! How do I update my profile again? Honestly, I think the link to Wikinews should point directly to the English version. But most importantly, I think Craig Spurrier's script for TheNewsWiki.org should be moved to wikinewsie.org , because one of the objections of Google News was that there was no community behind TheNewsWiki. It would be combining various efforts while killing two birds with one stone :-D (I know that doesn't sound right). In time, I think the wikinewsreports blog should also move there, so we can have all our off-site activities in one domain, and get Google News to list it. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't like the short profiles layout though, maybe just a tab on the right with our names should do it. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that profiles should be limited to ~500 chars, while I would love to read about your puppy growing up, and how much you love the local sports team...keep it to your userspace on Wiki, this site is supposed to be the "professional face". Sherurcij 22:45, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another site copying without attribution[edit]

We have another site coppying our material without attribution; this time it's some site called 'Men's News Daily'. There's not much we can do, just a heads up to keep an eye on them, and to send some carefuly worded e-mails if they persist. The copyvio in question is here. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 22:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They've got this too, which means they've probably copied everything recent. Still got no suggestion for where we go next with this, though. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 22:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They're linking to us as the source, which is good enough. MessedRocker (talk) 22:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
After careful inspection, I've now spotted a rather tiny link marked source, yes. Was on my way here to say I'd just seen that. *Sighs loudly*. To my mind, it's too small, but technically, yeah, there's nothing wrong with it. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 22:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They do, in fact, seem to remain in violation of the licence which we use: legal stuff. Section 4(a) requires a link to the licence and section 4(b) requires the name (and other stuff) of the entity holding the licence ("Wikinews"). Anyway, have a look there for yourselves - IANAL, after all :) Martinp23 22:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yay! An excuse for whacking them! Although they probable think they're in the right and will change it when we tell them they're not. And we're not really in a position to do much whacking, anyway. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 22:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to take the high-road and refuse to point out that this is an instance that could be diffused easily by pointing out to the copying site that "Wikinews offers both Public Domain and CC-BY stories. Please take careful notice of the license, if you do not wish to credit us as your source for any reason, then you may still use our PD stories." Sherurcij 00:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding of the license we use here is that

  1. Wikinewsies who make contributions do not waive their copyrights subsist in the contributions.
    • But your contribution may or may not be minimally creative to be protected by the copyright law.
    • If your contribution is mostly replaced by other people's, then perhaps you do not have any licensor status with regards to that version.
  2. When an external site is in violation of the license, Wikinewsies whose contribution is copied by the site can legitimately contact the site admin, and ask some correction.
    • In some cases, the use by the external site falls into fair use. This, of course, is not a violation of the license.

In general (without knowing a lot of details of this particular case), I personally think that it is a good idea to discuss the matter on Wikinews first and see if there are multiple Wikinewsies whose contributions are used in the external site. If there are, they can send a message to the external site as a group of Wikinewsies who are legitimate licensors.

Tomos 01:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANYONE who has edited that article can contact them and force them to comply, under the terms of the CC-BY-2.5 license. If they dont comply, we can ask the foundation to take action on our behalf. TheFearow 03:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They've got, it seems from what I've seen of them, almost all of our recent stories, they only cut out maybe one or two. Therefore, anyone who's made any recent contributions is having their copyright infringed. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 11:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They added a CC-BY-2.5 license link and source link to us, so they are no longer infringing. TheFearow 21:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's because they actually monitor Wikinews and what we say. They have mirrored us a long time. Technically they were doing nothing wrong. The license only lists a lot of what you say as suggestions and not necessarily requirements. When a site starts copying our articles and calling them their own and adding bylines and stuff, is when I start to worry. In other words, they are obviously NOT trying to do anything wrong or stealing anything. In fact if you go to google news and type Wikinews, (include duplicates) you see them come up. So I think that they have done nothing wrong. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 00:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki[edit]

I love you wiki, you complete my life. Gj on everything you do and continue to do for us.

G

Thank you for your compliment, it's good to know we're read and appriciated! Thunderhead - (talk) 21:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 things you did not know about Wikipedia[edit]

“ The Wikimedia Foundation directly operates eight sister projects to the encyclopedia: Wiktionary (a dictionary and thesaurus), Wikisource (a library of source documents), Wikimedia Commons (a media repository of more than one million images, videos, and sound files), Wikibooks (a collection of textbooks and manuals), Wikiversity (an interactive learning resource), Wikinews (an experiment in citizen journalism), Wikiquote (a collection of quotations), and Wikispecies (a directory of all forms of life). Like Wikipedia itself, all these projects are freely licensed and open to contributions. ”

While we may be an experiment in citizen journalism, I find it strange that Wiktionary isn't described as an experiment in dictionaries. I would go for something like Wikinews (a citizen journalism news site). Thoughts? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 07:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very good point. I was bold on WP and changed it to your suggested description. -- IlyaHaykinson 07:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikinews is a citizen journalism website, not an experiment! —FellowWiki Newsie 00:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I personally think all eight projects are experiments, but characterizing Wikinews alone as such is perhaps a product of past circumstances.
I remember that some people (including Jimbo) were quite cautious when launching the first Wikinews (this English version), partly because it could attract the attention of news organizations, including harsh criticisms. Wikinews was labeled "Beta" for a while for this and other reasons.
Now that Wikinews is not in Beta phase for quite a while and is not getting particularly close attention of media, I think characterizing it "experimental" is not that necessary. Tomos 01:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:DragonFire1024 mentioned in "The Phily Inquirer"[edit]

DragonFire1024 got a mention in this Philedelphia newspaper. See paragrath six and nine. Awesome! —FellowWiki Newsie 16:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Grandmother saw me in her paper in Las Vegas, Nevada. So it was republished in several newspapers. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

9,991 articles ![edit]

hey ! we are near 10,000 !!!!

champagne (or carrote juce if you prefere...)


Jacques Divol 19:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay!...Lol. —FellowWiki Newsie 19:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And we just hit 10000 with Search for Steve Fosset continues. And 10001 with English Wikinews has over 10000 articles. TheFearow 23:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the number is symbolic anyways, and the chance of dipping below 10K is pretty low. -- IlyaHaykinson 23:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the time thats published, we will definately have more, so it wont dip below at that point. For good measure we should wait till 10005 or 10010. Also, feel free to improve that article, I dont know what to put. TheFearow 23:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations my english-speaking folks! - Jurock (reply here) 02:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proper format for election coverage, Ontario[edit]

Interview with Paul Johnstone with Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, NDP candidate

There are 100 or so ridings in Ontario, and three or more MPP (member of provincial parliament) candidates in each. I've contacted all candidates from the NDP so far, and am searching for the information to contact all candidates from the Liberal and Conservative party, and smaller third parties. Any objections to me publishing them person-by-person; I'd rather publish them as they come in rather than riding-by-riding? -- Zanimum 19:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll take that as a no, hopefully, and publish them individually. -- Zanimum 17:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Shankbone interview project[edit]

Hey everyone. I think the word is starting to get around that I am looking to move the focus of my work off Wikipedia and on to Wikinews. In that regard, I am starting a new project focused on interviews. I currently have the following people lined up, or soon-to-be lined up:

  • Vivien Goldman - Punk rocker, former Flatmate of Chrissie Hynde of the Pretender; penned first biography of Bob Marley; "launched video career of Flava Flav"; NYU professor; journalist; wrote songs for Massive Attack;
  • Edmund White - author; Member of the American Academy of Arts and Letters, an Officier de l'Ordre des Arts et des Lettres, and a Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences; HIV+ gay man who is unapologetically promiscuous.
  • Bob Shrum - ran the Presidential campaigns of John Kerry and Al Gore; news commentator; NYU Professor.
  • Jim McGreevey - former Governor of New Jersey who resigned after a gay affair came to light while he was in office and married.
  • Evan Wolfson - founder of the modern gay marriage movement; one of Time Magazine's Most Influential People in the World; argued Boy Scouts v. Dale before the Supreme Court.

I can do these interviews on my own, but would prefer to collaborate with others on questions to ask, research, etc. Input, advice...all welcome. The links above are to Wikinews developing story pages. --David Shankbone 14:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All of those sound fantastic, and if you somehow manage to score McGreevy, that'll be a really big score. But again, all of them sound great. -- Zanimum 16:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
McGreevey won't be a problem. Goldman is already a yes. Shrum I have a photo shoot with already (I don't suppose an interview would be much more trouble). White has said yes to a photo shoot. Wolfson is a friend. --David Shankbone 19:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Front Page Photo of Iraq Police with misleading heading.[edit]

Shame on you guys! The photo caption was U.S. will withdraw 30,000 troops before Spring 2008. The truth ? What the administration actually said is that they MIGHT withdraw troops. I remind you of what everyone seems to forget - Bush said 3 years ago when asked about ending the war that it would be left to the next administration to end the war. Bush has made it clear that he has never had any intention of ending the war. Drawing down troops is extremly unlikely. Pat Mitchell

Uh, by "extremly unlikely", I'm lead to think that you aren't aware that those troops are required by law to leave; their military service is ending at that time. The withdrawal has nothing to do with the Iraq report. irid:t 02:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brooklyn Book Festival[edit]

Hey guys - I photographed at the Brooklyn Book Festival yesterday. About 45 new head shots of notable authors. I am going to write a story for Wikinews about the event. If anyone would like to use the photographs, they can be found here (I still have about 10 to upload): http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:2007_Brooklyn_Book_Festival
--David Shankbone 14:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

great ! Jacques Divol 14:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent :) —FellowWiki Newsie 21:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Those are some excellent images - good work. Can't wait to see the article! Matt | userpage | contribs 21:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Google News[edit]

Does anyone know how we can start to get our stories fed to Google News? Is there a reason why this would not be desirable? --David Shankbone 18:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a recurring issue with new editors. Google news will not list us because we do not have an editorial review process and anyone can edit. We do have one associated blog listed where articles end up listed on Google. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. It's surprising considering some of the things they allow on there. I think we could make the argument that we do have an editorial review process, though. --David Shankbone 18:49, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're question arise 1 or 2 time a year. Someone did contact Google (i do not remember who) but the answer was NO. It's a complexe problem. My usual answeris : Time is with us ! Jacques Divol 20:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What about FlaggedRevs? If we give google the correct instructions, their bot can crawl the last revision marked as good. That's editorial review, but still open. Matt | userpage | contribs 21:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify with FlaggedRevs - if you want to try them out, check out the implementation on sandboxwiki (link, username=sandbox, password=sandbox). Just register an account and flag some revisions on a new page (by default its limited to certain groups to do that, but on sandbox wiki its near-admin rights by default) Matt | userpage | contribs 21:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Shankbone Interview[edit]

I photographed Nadine Strossen today. I had this appointment set up before my Wikinews accreditation request, but she agreed to an interview (to be arranged). She is the President of the ACLU. Just as exciting: she is going to contact Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas on my behalf for interviews. If you pray, pray. If you cross your fingers, cross your fingers. --David Shankbone 21:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting an interview with one of the Justices would be awesome :D. I wish you good luck. Sean Heron 17:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Format for Wikinews articles in Wikipedia[edit]

I like our infoboxes on Wikipedia, but once the news becomes stale they are likely to be removed. What should be the format for linking to old stories that may still be of use? The answer seems likely in having it as an external link, such as this:

Is that right, or is there another agree-upon format? --David Shankbone 20:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if I quite understand you. Maybe {{Wikinews}} is the answer for linking to older news from recent news. - Jurock (reply here) 20:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that they aren't particularly likely to get removed even after news is stale. For an example of old news there, see Pope John Paul II's article. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have a template to include to all news for topics; for instance, on the Pope John Paul page, is there something similar to the "Commons has media related to..." template that would link to all the stories we have written about John Paul, and not, for instance, just about the one where he died? --David Shankbone 21:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, just create Category:John Paul and link that from the Wikipedia template. Matt | userpage | contribs 21:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phone interview[edit]

I have an offer of a phone interview with Allan Murray who is one of the guys responsible for http://www.omovies.com, watch the vids and give questions you'd like to ask. --Brian McNeil / talk 07:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on where he is I may need someone in a closer timezone to do the actual interview. --Brian McNeil / talk 07:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When is the interview?--David Shankbone 14:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Too bad the Audio sub-project sort fo died. A recorded phone interview could be useful to Audio wikinews. Bawolff ☺☻

Wikinews Interview with John Vanderslice[edit]

Wikinews is schedule to do an interview with musician w:John Vanderslice this Wednesday, September 26. If you have any questions you'd like to ask John or know about John, please leave them on my Talk page. Thanks. --David Shankbone 15:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews interview with Presidential Candidate w:Tom Tancredo[edit]

I will be interviewing Tom Tancredo tomorrow for WIkinews. Please leave any questions you have for him on my Talk page. Thanks. --David Shankbone 19:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian President Protest[edit]

I have some *great* photos and some *great* audio files from today. Thanks to James for overnighting the press pass - I wouldn't have been able to move in and out without it. The most amazing audio file, which will be the first thing I upload because I love it so much, is a debate over Freedom of Speech and the Devil between a large Holy Ghost black Christian lady who sounds *just* like Grizelda from John Waters' w:Desperate Living and an old white secular Jewish guy who--no lie--sounds *exactly* like Larry David. I am in love with this audio file. --David Shankbone 20:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian President Ahmadinejad speaks at Columbia University[edit]

I need to take a break from writing the article and I think it would benefit from other eyes an hands. Plus, I have my interview with Tom Tancredo tomorrow at 1:15 and I need to bone up for that. Have at it guys. --David Shankbone 02:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving[edit]

I have archived September 8, 2007. So anything BEFORE then needs to be checked, prepped and then archived. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 04:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bat for Lashes plays the Bowery Ballroom: an Interview with Natasha Khan[edit]

I think this should be a feature on the Wikinews page. This artist is very significant, and was the odds-on favorite to win the coveted Mercury Prize. It was a real coup for us to get her to talk to do an interview with Wikinews, and I think it's a good one. The crowd at the Bowery Ballroom was very hip and young, and I think we'll get some new readers and attention with her interview. It's very exciting. It was already picked up in less than six hours by some French news site: http://www.afriquenligne.fr/news/daily-news/bat-for-lashes-plays-the-bowery-ballroom:-an-interview-with-natasha-khan-200709289539/
--David Shankbone 13:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indirect Main page vandalism[edit]

It had to happen, and it did here, though I have no idea whether this is a common occurrence. Cascading semi-protection might have to become necessary. w:User:Circeus 17:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I've protected all of the pages. I will also protect all of the new ones. —FellowWiki Newsie 21:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cascading semi-protection no longer is possible (you have to have full protect to cascade). I've made all the date pages auto protected once they come onto front page as no one should edit them anyways. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stats[edit]

Javascript has been added that should give us stats, most popular is the only one I know at the moment. This will show details in a day or two when we've had more people start using the new Javascript. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So... Do a hard refresh of your browser. Shift-Ctrl-R for Firefox. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
cool. Bawolff ☺☻ 20:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And for those unfortunates among us who are stuck in a hospital library IT room with only IE available? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template boxes[edit]

Hey guys - do we have a left-justified Wikinews box on Wikipedia? If not, can we create one? Sometimes infoboxes and templates that are pre-existing take up all the real estate on the right side of the screen. --David Shankbone 13:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we do. Bawolff ☺☻ 21:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't think it would hurt to create one. Do it. —FellowWiki Newsie 21:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews Tip line[edit]

I started the Wikinews Tip line at http://groups.google.com/group/wikinews-tip-line. It is a tip line that people can request a news article for Wikinews. Jet123 01:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We already have scoop@wikinewsie.org and the Wikinews Hotline. We also have Wikinews:Requested Stories. I don't see the need for an external system, especially since if it was needed we could host it locally. But apart from that, I like the idea, and thanks for helping out :) Matt | userpage | contribs 20:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obesity and the Fat Acceptance Movement: Kira Nerusskaya speaks[edit]

It was bound to happen sooner or later. Frank Messina was worried about the Allen Ginsberg question, but relented and then thought it was a good question. Well, Kira is concerned about the Fat Women and Sexuality section of this interview. She is a teacher for a Catholic school, which is her day job as she works on the film. She is concerned that this section, and the photo in particular, could have ramifications. She loves --loves-- the interview, but she all of a sudden is having some second thoughts. I've asked her to sleep on it and contact me tomorrow. The best case scenario is that we may need to tweak the section, probably remove the photo and put up another one (that photo is her favorite) and the worst case scenario is the entire section would need to be moved. Comments? --David Shankbone 01:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is fine - part of the interview is that they have to be comfortable, yes? Lyellin 01:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I have lines. I wouldn't have removed the Ginsberg question in Messina's case. The theory there is that questions are questions, and poets are asked about the work and stances of other poets ad nauseum. He answered it appropriately. However, I added text from one of his e-mails to his response to make him more comfortable. I have quite a bit of theory involved in the interviews, and a minor one is that they are uncontroversial with the subject. Like I said, in Messina's case, unless he resolutely insisted, I would not have removed the question (we had discussion about it). I have talked a lot with Augusten Burroughs about what he doesn't want included in that interview (that's a heavy one, for both him and me). In this case, if the interviewee is worried she will have job ramifications, it's a must. She is going to sleep on it. But I told her she has the ultimate say-so. --David Shankbone 02:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't read the Messina piece (yet) and thus don't know what the "Ginsburg" question is. However, I suggest that if you give an interviewee "approval powers" or "editorial control" or whatever (those two sound too harsh), you'd need to do those run-by's before you publish the interview. Yes, you can change it tomorrow, but any website (as we are CC-BY2.5) could have mirrored it by now. While there are only few sites that do so, those that do, probably already did. --SVTCobra 02:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the main issue for Kira is the photograph. --David Shankbone 02:30, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is my favorite photo, too. Does that count? But seriously, I don't think it would be considered "revisionist" if you took down the image. Wikinews is still largely a print (read: text) forum. --SVTCobra 02:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia discussion of Nerusskaya interview on w:Obesity[edit]

I have a page owner who keeps removing the Nerusskaya interview from the very appropriate w:Obesity#Contemporary_culture section. "You did the interview yourself" appears to be the main argument, along with "it's opinion". Both of these arguments are silly, and I used to see the "DIY" argument used against my photography, which was a losing argument. The issue has been raised on the Talk page, it anyone wants to add their voice to the discussion there. --David Shankbone 12:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Brownback on running for President, gay rights, the Middle East and religion[edit]

This interview will be ready once an introduction is written. I think we should hold off and run it as the lead on Monday. Any comments? --David Shankbone 20:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monday sounds good. A lot of people tend to read and edit during the week days. —FellowWiki Newsie 20:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting interviews[edit]

If you guys have people you would like to interview, from any walk of life, someone you find inspiring or interesting, now would be the time to write them and ask, since we have two big name interview on the front page...it makes it look like people want to talk to us. Also, any interviews I do or anyone does that lends gloss or credibility to the Wikinews project can be used to your credit as well. "Dear so-and-so, I am writing to request an interview for... We have recently interviewed Gay Talese, Senator Sam Brownback, Augusten Burroughs, etc. etc." Putting a line like that in any request you make will open doors, whether you conducted the interview or not. --David Shankbone 23:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Journalist Interview project[edit]

Hey,

I am starting a small interview project, starting with an interview of Sue Gardner.

I would love it if others could contribute some questions or ideas of who to interview next at User:Matt/JournalistInterview. Most of the interviews will be live on IRC so many of us can participate. I would love it if David or someone else with lots of interview experience could add some questions or such. Matt | userpage | contribs 23:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Audio files[edit]

I've been asked a couple of times whether I will make audio files available of the interviews, and the answer is most likely not. Not everything in the interviews is transcribed; particularly discussions that revolve around me. Some of it isn't pertinent to the conversation, some of it I don't particularly want to share. I'm asked to leave certain things out by the interviewees, which I always comply with. I don't have the time to learn to splice and cut things out for a smooth audio file. I also don't conduct the interviews as audio interviews, meaning topics are scattered and when put into written form are reorganized so that they are organized by themes for a more cogent read. To do audio interviews would require more preparation and thought into the organization of the questions, and the interviewees aren't expecting that their voices are going to be broadcast. --David Shankbone 14:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recently thought of asking you, but I see why you dont. Although if you ever want to i'd be happy to lend my audio editing skills. Matt | userpage | contribs 20:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Our tool is broken[edit]

It appears our page count tool [1] is not working for the last couple of days. --David Shankbone 15:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Danish Wikinewsies? (Danish Prime Minister calls an election for 2007)[edit]

Are there any Danish Wikinewsies, who could help me arrange election interviews of candidates in this election? -- Zanimum 18:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am fluent in the Danish language but have no special talents at gaining access to candidates. If you want to contact them in their native tongue, I'd be happy to translate. Likewise, if you receive material in Danish I can translate it to English. I suppose I could be more efficient in navigating Dansih websites to find contact info. Drop me a note on my talk page if I can be of assistance. --SVTCobra 22:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are Wikinewsies bullies sometimes?[edit]

I had discussions with a new user, which were based on some hurt feelings he had in how he felt he was treated during his first experiences here. I believe the user is sincere in his concerns and feel some discussion on the matter is warranted. In a nutshell, I think he feels that some admins (me included) were too harsh in our handling of his first contributions, and didn't provide enough feedback or encouragement. Some of the items were tagged as copy-vios and some were deleted. He highlighted his negative experience as perhaps a systematic pattern of bullying on the part of admins, which may cause some new users to leave in frustration. Please drop in some comments or suggestions on how we could improve things for new users. Jcart1534 01:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Generally, I would agree. I think we aren't nice enough on this project. The problem we have is not one of quality, it's quantity: we don't have manpower and Users would prefer to work on Wikipedia. My Peruvian meteorite article I stopped updating because it became hopeless against Wikipedia's. We're brusque, we "bite the newcomers" and when people come looking for accreditation instead of telling them that there's a process, and outlining it for them, we basically say, "You haven't done enough and when you do we'll let you know." I find edit summaries like this to be offensive. There's no reason to start out an edit summary with "What the fuck?" and that would never fly on Wikipedia. The answer to "What the fuck?" in this case was that I had taken three hours off work to go photograph an event, without pay, go back to work, go home at night and then spend another four hours trying to write an article, upload photos, etc. That the article wasn't in pristine condition when I was finished doesn't deserve some of the ruler-slapping-my-hand edit summaries found; frankly, I thought it was in good shape considering I spent seven hours working on it and, you know, have a life and was just trying to get it up while it was "fresh." So, sure, I agree with the user. We aren't a very nice project and we can do better. Until it's a nicer place to work, most people don't see any benefit of coming here and would rather go to Wikipedia. We could start by approaching each other with gentle suggestions instead of as taskmasters. --David Shankbone 02:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I'm not an admin - I don't have to be nice! And "wtf" (which I did use) is a lot more acceptable than "What the fuck" anyways. Don't misquote me. Sherurcij 02:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It still applies to you, and we all know what "WTF" means, and yeah, you don't need to be such a jerk. --David Shankbone 02:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It does not, the topic is clearly about admins who have an additional onus to "be polite" - besideswhich it's fairly well-established that I am unerringly polite to newcomers anyhow - I just act brusquely and don't give a crap about veterans - especially those who get all crotchety "I photographed Ahmadinejad, thus you aren't allowed to point out my bias in statements like "his horrific treatment of gays" or "For those expecting to hear denials of reality, Ahmadinejad did not disappoint." I think you're a fantastic photographer, I honestly do. But I also think you're a POV-pushing reporter who's unable to separate "facts" from "beliefs" - and no, I won't be "tactful" about pointing it out when I see it. If you want to discuss my behaviour, come to my talk page or eMail me - this topic is cleary about admins and mistreatment of newbies...neither of which apply to me. Sherurcij 02:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, the topic goes beyond that, because your behavior wouldn't fly on Wikipedia. You talk out your ass, as you did on the Trisha Posner piece. You talk about "legal common sense" which, for someone who actually has been to law school, found that laughable. The Columbia story wasn't complete, and I wasn't the one who published it and I made that clear that I was too tired to keep working on it. Many of the facts I used came from the New York Times. No, I didn't sit there for another hour and half to watch the speech, I relied on outside sources. I didn't have the time. I hammered something out for others to work with. I think your behavior here is very much at issue, and news flash: I have been on Wikinews for about two weeks. Regardless, your behavior and the way you edit, and your comments and their tone, are entirely inappropriate by all standards of behavior, and you need to improve. It's no surprise you aren't an admin. I changed the title of this section so that you can realize that this issue applies to you. --David Shankbone 02:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Out of interest, were these new users ones with red-linked names or IP addresses? At least on other Wiki projects, that seems to bring out the "assume the worst, treat them like vandals" attitude. Not sure if it's the case here, but perhaps even just making more of a point to use the ((welcome)) template and include a 'strong' recommendation that they sign up and make a Userspace page for themselves. Sherurcij 02:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that is usually the case, Sherurcij. For my part, I did learn something from the experience. I was rushed and didn't have enough time to properly deal with some edits. I tagged them, due to some concerns, but couldn't follow-up further. Others took over, which is great, but I now realize that an important part of the process is guiding the new user. Some admins are good at that communication, but some of us don't do it enough (or with enough sensitivity). Even with copy-vios, the user may just be ignorant of the rules and may only need some friendly guidance. Jcart1534 02:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A couple days ago I was thinking of drawing up a CopyVio template for user talk pages, saying something along the lines of "Thank you for your recent addition to our site - unfortunately we've had to blank the article as a copyright violation since it seems to have been copy/pasted from another news source. Luckily, the law does not allow the copyright of information, only of presentation - so if you would like to rewrite the story in your own words, then we would love to once again publish it." Would something like this be a good idea, or just be another useless, never-used template? Sherurcij 02:48, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A template does exist, but I have yet to use it! Jcart1534 02:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know Brianmc and others are keen on recruiting Wikipedians to contribute here. Perhaps we need to welcome them with a help page something like "Migrating from Wikipedia?". All the slight editing differences between Wikipedia and Wikinews could be highlighted there in one place. Might help with the transition? Jcart1534 03:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sherurcij is right that admins have an extra responsibility to be polite and helpful. New users, especially, look to admins for guidance. I had originally titled this section Are admins bullies sometimes, but David Shankbone renamed it, appropriately I believe, to include all Wikinewsies. If we want to grow our user base, we all need to do a better job at welcoming. Jcart1534 03:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Of course wikimedians are bullies... oh maybe I got the nomenclature messed up... new editors need to realize they are talking turkey. -Edbrown05 10:07, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You mean talking policy and rules. Don't go telling any new users that as its a blatant lie. Simple: if you don't want to follow the rules, leave...or be blocked. Policy is policy...like it or not. Want it changed? Hold a vote. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 10:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I mean new users don't have the slightest idea of what is going on here. Then they are met with these "profound" and put-off-ish templates. The people greeted with these templates are the new persons trying (often for their purposes) to report. -Edbrown05 10:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A cop-out is to say I dunno, but I do know. A template is no way to greet someone. Something personal and intimate exceeds anything any organization could say. I never use the 'hello' template. (While ultimately they should be aware of it). I say what is on my mind, that is what they care about.... we ain't a computer... -Edbrown05 10:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the idea of a page for users transitioning from other WMF projects is something that should be added to the various welcoming templates. I was emailed about the case with Jcart above, the user was extremely unhappy claiming the copyvio was not such and the blog copied us (this should be verifiable from timestamps). There was also an issue of associating the user with his IP address. This is unacceptable. Yes, it was a new user, perhaps they had been slightly belligerent and made it obvious the IP and username were the same. This is information to share privately - you won't get it out of me or the other Brian from checkuser as that's policy. So, if you figure it out for yourself don't stick it on the wiki.
While agreeing we are in need of improvement I'd point out that I've seen far worse on other wikis. Zach and I had a run in with an admin on wiktionary where we both queried a block and were threatened ourselves.
So while we perhaps need a "best on-wiki practices" document it is more important that we are able to discuss where people have perhaps been unduly harsh - or that their character is "blunt" and while not meaning to do so they write off-putting comments or edit summaries.
In any case I don't want to lose the "wild west" feel that Wikinews currently has. Yes, we have issues sometimes bringing in new contributors, but the community that does exist is more close than that on Wikipedia. Perhaps when Wikipedia was at 10K articles it was the same. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, Brianmc, I suppose I went too far with the IP thing. However, I was approached by a user who had just created an inflammatory user name and came at me out of the blue with unfounded personal attacks. I simply went about defending myself and my reputation. It was through that process, though, that the user's real concerns about Wikinews and newbies came out. My revelation was to realize that I must have done something, unknowingly, to really annoy this user. So it was worth some introspection. Had I been more sensitive in the first place (see very first paragraph above), I wouldn't have gotten into a row to begin with, and we might have had a happy new contributor. Jcart1534 12:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"...it is more important that we are able to discuss where people have perhaps been unduly harsh - or that their character is "blunt" and while not meaning to do so they write off-putting comments or edit summaries." I agree, and I also like the "Wild West" feel. But almost any sister project is going to be getting its newbies from Wikipedia, where there is an almost kindergarten teacher atmosphere of congeniality, where the slightest brusque comment is an "attack". I don't want us to be that by any measure. But I felt with my original accreditation request, then with the recent, and now with Sherucij, that we need to give more consideration to Wikinews:Etiquette. First and foremost, because people listen more when we make efforts at "outreach" and not "smacking them in the face" and this is especially true of myself. Regarding the Columbia article, I knew there were problems with it but I was just too damned tired to work with it. The original way I write a news story isn't the way it should end up. What is most bothersome about the way Sherucij has been commenting on my pieces, and she confirmed it above, is that there is no assumption of good faith. Instead of thinking, "Shankbone does not have a low-level job, and he is investing about 6 hours a day on the Wikinews project, and weekends, and his blunders may be time and exhaustion issues," I get "you're a POV-pushing reporter who's unable to separate "facts" from "beliefs" - and no, I won't be "tactful"". This attitude of it's my way or the highway is wholly unacceptable. And for newbies strolling over here in good faith from Wikipedia, who are accustomed to a well-developed style of communication over there, we are shooting ourselves in the foot with attracting more volunteers here by accommodating it. There has to be a happy median between being the kindergarten that is Wikipedia and a serious, nice but sometimes gruff Wild West that Wikinews wants to be. --David Shankbone 12:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with David's comment above, and should any other issues of - what I was once blocked for - namely, "great incivility" come to my attention I may apply blocks or request users put a case for dispute resolution. There are the one or two cases where you do end up having to deal with POV-pushers and you may have little choice but to be blunt, but that should be preceded by an effort to highlight where you see POV issues. I didn't see that here, and we may have lost a valuable contributor as a consequence. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This issue has gone to the foundation mailing list. Eloquence is proposing that all contributors sign up to a code of conduct. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I, unfortunately, have to agree with Jcart1534 and David Shankbone: we urgently have to brush up on our communication skills and treat eachother more nicely, as recent events illustrate. I disagree with Sherurcij: this concerns everyone, not just admins, and we need to treat every user kindly. We generally don't have as much time we would like to have on Wikinews, so we tend to screw up, scaring away new users, making our job again harder.
When I migrated here from Wikipedia, I decided to stay because I found a warm community: that is what will make people want to stay. But I had 3K edits on WP back then, so I knew how a wiki works. I agree with Ed: newcomers don't take the time to read the FAQs, or agressive warning tags, ... a personal explanation can do miracles, but only if you are in a good mood to do so. Some ideas:

Summary[edit]

Discussion summary (if you don't have the time to read all the above):

  • Recent events show that new users need to be treated in a more friendly manner, especially by admins.
  • In fact, this form of Wikinews:Etiquette applies to all your messages or edit summaries to other users. We're all working hard and if someone gets stressed, not much is needed to drive somebody into a wikibreak.
  • We really need new contributors but if we don't take the time to explain things to them and instead great them with templates and deleting, they will be scared away.
  • ...
Discussion summary (if you don't have the time to read all the above):
  • Recent events show that new users need to be treated in a more friendly manner, especially by admins.
  • In fact, this form of Wikinews:Etiquette applies to all your messages or edit summaries to other users. We're all working hard and if someone gets stressed, not much is needed to drive somebody into a wikibreak.
  • We really need new contributors but if we don't take the time to explain things to them and instead great them with templates and deleting, they will be scared away.
  • ...

Ideas to meet these goals:

  • Simply behave well-mannered from now on!
  • Creating a help page for immigrants from other projects, such as Wikipedia
  • Maybe set up an Esperanza-like project, or give eachother more encouraging words? More use of Wikinews:Trophy?
  • ...
Ideas to meet these goals:
  • Simply behave well-mannered from now on!
  • Creating a help page for immigrants from other projects, such as Wikipedia
  • Maybe set up an Esperanza-like project, or give eachother more encouraging words? More use of Wikinews:Trophy?
  • ...

Another NPOV citizen news website?[edit]

By typing in Wikinws in Google News I found the article Registered sex offender arrested for luring MySpace teenager to meeting on http://www.huliq.com/ [2]. They say nothing about editorials just: "Our mission is to report the news and inform the public. Our news comes from Huliq editors, organizations that submit news stories and from citizen journalists. The driving force to write a news story is to share your event with the world and promote information." [3] And they've also got a Russian version. [4] We've got competition. —FellowWiki Newsie 01:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's intresting. I think there website looks much more news like then ours. (On a side note, their blog is in debug mode) We should probably remind them that any story they take from us has to mention the license. user:Bawolff 23:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These are articles of ours they've used: [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] user:Bawolff
I never quite understood why cc-by-2.0 forces you to mention the license; it only requires attribution, and you would expect that cc-by-sa is the license which forces you to override a copyright notice, or am I just being stupid here? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That site appears to be down, at least right now. --SVTCobra 23:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's up. must have been really temporary. --SVTCobra 01:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All of the CC licenses need to be mentioned because the license pages say "For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page." —FellowWiki Newsie 01:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Two of the stories linked here, link back to Wikinews, the rest just mention our name. --SVTCobra 01:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say that while their page's layout has a general structure similar to that of other news sites, it doesn't look more professional than the Wikinews page. The styling of their site seems to have little regard for element padding/margins and/or other methods of separating different sections of the page. Thus, I think Wikinews has better usability/readability, even if the means for finding one's way around the site might still use a little work.67.163.165.236 05:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Census[edit]

The first ever Wikimedia Census will be held in late 2007. Each project is included in the Census. Questions regarding the Wikinews project are being posted there. Please add as many as you feel. —FellowWiki Newsie 02:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Letter of Assignment ... again[edit]

Hello everybody,

I have a question or proposal very similiar to one I have already made previously: I´m travelling to South East Asia in November, and I´ve been thinking of doing reporting on the UN Climate Conference in Bali (that is being held in December). To recieve access to the press center there, I´d need to be accredited for the event. For this purpose I would require a letter of assignment similiar to this one.

Now, things haven´t changed from the last time (the Wikinews Foundation would of course be perfect to adress matters like this), so this is not a normal procedure. Therefore I wanted to ask input from as many people as possible, especially regarding the matter of if you are in favor of "assigning" me to go there or not. I realize there are reasons that speak against: Perhaps the most profound is the lack of material that I ended up producing after attending the last event (G8 Heiligendamm). I believe though, that with a more sufficient span of time to prepare for the event (which, in contrast to the G8-conference, I am able to take), I could certainly do a better, and perhaps at least mediocre job of reporting on the event.

Thank you for reading, and many kind regards, Sean Heron 09:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You got my attention right away...User Thunderhead has an idea that is right up this ally. Leave a message on his talk page saying I sent you and that you have a request on the Water Cooler about climate...Cannot say too much so I will let him tell you. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sean, what DragonFire1204 said has nothing to do with the letter of assignment. It is about something related to it, however.
About the event: We can have a vote below if people accept you to go to this event. Then, if you are accepted, create a page called Wikinews:Accreditation_requests/Letter_of_Authorization2 and copy the text from Wikinews:Accreditation_requests/Letter_of_Authorization there. —FellowWiki Newsie 16:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, I just saw that they´ve put up a deadline for accreditation applications, Wednesday, the 28th of November. I was then glad to read that I could "Start the application process by submitting the online accreditation form" , and so wouldn´t need the letter of assignment until later. But the online accreditation form is less skimpy then the one for Heiligendamm: They want the adress of the Media Organization I´m going for, and Name and Phone number of the Chief Editor :( . That´s quite a downer... Sean Heron 19:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I just read something that sounds more welcome in the Q&A:
"I am a freelance journalist. Can I still get accreditation?
Freelance journalists are subject to the same requirements for accreditation and must complete the full process, as above. Freelance journalists, including photographers, must provide clear evidence they are on assignment from a specific news organization or publication. A valid assignment letter from that news organization, or publication, is required." I guess those criteria are possible to be fulfilled :D. Regards Sean Heron 19:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I just realized the deadline is next month... lol, so no hurry or worries :D. I guess I might remove the flag...
I think to some extent you could call any experienced wikinewsie with a press card and possibly admin rights (since our treshold is low) your Chief Editor. I mean we are a wiki so we can't ever have a chief editor, so you can do 2 things: 1) just explain that we are against chief editors and that you got accredited by the community, and that they can call the hotline and check on a locked credential verification page, or 2) pick any random reporter-admin in good standing, possibly someone on the ARBCOM or something, and let them play the part of chief editor.
But basically, you have the approval of the community to do OR, so just be bold and go for it, don't mind their rules too much, just explain the situation and downplay the situation.
Alternatively, if you really wanted somebody to act as Chief Editor, I might get you in touch with the editor of the Belgian Indymedia, and you might get a letter from her, if you would allow me to translate some of your original reporting and license it for them too, like a dual license. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. Hmm, I'm afraid I don't think they'd be very chuffed hearing 1) to be honest :). So I reckon I´ll ask somebody if he/she is willing to stand in as my chief editor again.
On Indymedia: that might have been a good idea, but I´ve already applied for my Journalist Visa at the Indonesian Consulate and I stated I was going for the Wikinews, so thats out of the question I´m afraid. The other thing is, I checked up on their licensing (the Belgian Indymedias) and it seems to me that they don´t need our approval if they want to incorporate any of our work (as we aren´t using a CC Sharealike). If I understand the licensing correctly, as long as they state "by Wikinews" or something, they can post it under their CC "no derivatives, no commercial use" (which I personally find not a very good licence, but thats beside the point) without a problem.
Regards Sean Heron 09:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll put on my "Chief Editor" hat again if you need it. :-P The other person that would be good for it would be Craig Spurrier as he is a bureaucrat. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I should announce here, that with the help of a letter signed by Brian, I have recieved accreditation for the event, and will be flying to Bali on December the first :D ! Check here regarding Infos on the conference, what I plan to report on, etc. Kind Regards, Sean Heron 00:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tibet[edit]

Last month I made an attempt to get an interview with the Dalai Lama. I spoke with Tashi Wangdi, Representative of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to the Americas, in September in anticipation of the DL's trip here, and learned it's an impossibility to arrange in such short an amount of time to interview him (makes sense). The DL's trips are planned a year in advance, and finalized six months in advance. However, just yesterday Wangdi said I can arrange an interview with him once he returns from traveling with the DL, after November 3. Questions for Wangdi should be posed here. Keep in mind that the Chinese government obsessively monitors outside news sources over such issues as Tibet and the Falun Gong, so any story we produce will likely get some attention from its operators. --David Shankbone 13:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great :) I hope we get him :) DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, this will get Wikinews a lot of attention. I totally support having this interview but we need to get more questions. —FellowWiki Newsie 01:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WNN radio[edit]

Who started Wikinews Network Radio? And can we all have access? do live shows? This would be a great asset to Wikinews... fess up :-P DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 13:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So who is interested in doing a weekly radio show...talk radio maybe? lets try this. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 11:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I started another thing like this a while ago, but I have no idea who started that one. Matt/TheFearow | userpage | contribs 20:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was TUFKAAP. Bawolff ☺☻ 21:48, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like the idea of talk radio for Wikinews. It is not within our goals of NPOV and I prefer the more professional way of recording. I enjoy listening to the news briefs and news articles that are uploaded to Commons, not the java stuff on other websites that we don't really share the same goals with. Sorry if I sound close minded. —FellowWiki Newsie 01:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever is doing it, needs help in reading. The frequent "no, wait, it says," as well as the breathing into the microphone made it impossible for me to listen to the entire report. --SVTCobra 02:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the goal is experiment into this type of thing. As such we shouldn't judge it as an official publication thing, more as a way of playing around, seeing if it works, if it does great, how can we intergrate it/improve it, if it doesn't, well it was worth looking into. As a side note, if we were to adopt something like this, I'd imagine we'd want to get it on to our servers under a system that used streaming ogg (I assume something like that exists) as opposed to some flash do-hicky for the free content reason. Bawolff ☺☻ 02:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I built a system similair to this using Icecast, that would allow us to do live shows/coverage, play Audio Wikinews and News Breifs content, with live CC-licensed music. I prefer that sort of thing to talk radio, as it allows greater control. Also using Icecast many people can have clients and connect into the station as hosts, rather than having to have one specific host. Matt/TheFearow | userpage | contribs 04:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have some experience in running Internet radio stations - including some specialist software and access to a massive recording / editing studio at school. Count me in if this project starts up. --Skenmy(t•c•w•i) 20:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone ever did manage to get some sort of radio thing going, Involving Spoken wikipedia, and audio projects of other projects might be a good idea (Although Spoken wikipedia is nothing like a made for radio documentary, it still can be pretty interesting to listen to). With all the content over various wikimedia projects, I imagine a pretty good WM-radio type thing could be put together. Bawolff ☺☻ 20:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews Network on Blogtalkradio[edit]

This was something I was fooling around with a bit and unless that Wikicast idea ever comes to fruition we could use this.

[10]

Mind you, it's very very very bad. I wanted someone to call in from #wikinews, I got no callers, which restored to me having to read of Contra's comment on air. More or less, I'm aiming for a Washington Journal type thing, although I guess would could go with no callers, I just don't know if the site administration would be happy with that. Bu this is an EXPERIMENT mind you, if it doesn't work I will plug the plug.

Anyone willing to try this out? I don't have a voice cut out for radio, and I also need a script. --TUFKAAP 01:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*raises hand* Yes, it was me. :) Alrighty, if anyone wants access, just leave me a message on my talk page because I'm not going to post it on Wikinews anywhere for none-too-obvious security reasons (Troll hijacks internet radio show, creditability ruined) ;). And yes, Cobra was I was doing this off top of my head, it's a test, I didn't have a prepared script, and also, this wasn't over a microphone, it was over my cell phone (the microphone interface was being a screwy that night.) Finally, FWN, we have a comments namespace now, so why not let people call in, like I said, I want this be like Washington Journal in which you just state your opinion, not a drug-addeled Limbaugh cheesefest. --TUFKAAP 06:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Democratic National Convention[edit]

Should we send someone for Wikinews, and if so, who? The convention is in Denver, so any local Wikinewsies, speak up now. Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 22:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Stephen Colbert lead photo[edit]

The crappy selection of photos for Colbert grated on me for awhile; I had the opportunity to go take some new ones tonight and I'm letting the page vote on the four best to decide which to use for the new lead on his article on Wikipedia. Go vote if you're interested. --David Shankbone 02:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stat requests[edit]

Hey techies,

could we use the statistics tool to tell use which pages got the most views in a 24-hour period? So we could have a box "Yesterday's most popular stories". My favourite Belgian news site has that (http://www.standaard.be).

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Privacy reasons. (Same reason we can't use google stats). Any stats stuff should be done on wikimedia servers as far as i understand. We could easily use the statistics tool to do this, but it might not do yesterdays most popular (as far as i can tell, and bare in mind I'm probably wrong and don't know what i'm tlaking about) as it seems to record over a months period of time. (/me goes looks into this) Bawolff ☺☻ 00:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So is it already listing the top story over a one month period, or does it give the ranking since this system was set up? Why can't we set it to a shorter period? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 00:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I'm really not sure how it works, so i could be spewing utter lies (I'm serious. this is probably untrue), but the impression i get is it totals the number of views for each page, and resets the number every month (I think). So if we have a really popular article on November 3, it might be still high on the list on Nov 28, as nothing matched its popularity, even though it hasn't been looked at for a good 15 days. (remember that is probably a lie). Bawolff ☺☻ 05:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to a bot, I think i got a simple one working. I did a simple test on {{Popular articles}}, and it seemed to work. Should I ask for bot perm for it at WN:BOT?Bawolff ☺☻ 05:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikinews:Bots#user:Bawolff_bot. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews:Deletion requests/Archives[edit]

Why is the archive for DRs (Wikinews:Deletion requests/Archives) split into two? I realize that one is for those that were deleted and the other for those that weren't, but why have two archives? It makes it a real pain to archive stuff from WN:DR. In fact, it discouraged me from doing so tonite. I don't see the great usefulness of doing this. Other archives don't seem to be split this way. --SVTCobra 03:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because thats how it was done historically, and traditions continue. I don't see any problem with combining all the new archives. In the past when I've tried searching the archives, I found the split not only had no benefits, but was also annoying as i didn't know whether the article passed or failed. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, now that you mention it, I think it's completely pointless, so just create a new archive where it's all mixed.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I drew a line in the sand and made a change. It can just as easily be changed back as it would have been to archive according to the old custom in the first place. See (Wikinews:Deletion requests/Archives). --SVTCobra 04:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Muizelaar interview[edit]

This weekend I will start drafting questions to ask Andrea Muizelaar, the winner of the first cycle of Canada's Next Top Model. She has spoken out against the fashion industry and the Top Model franchise since winning, and has since retired from modeling after one year in Canadian fashion, due to legal troubles, mismanagement, and anorexia. If you have any questions you'd like to ask Andrea, please edit the story preparation page linked in the header here and edit. Thanks! TheCustomOfLife 06:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone want to do a Writer's Guild Strike interview?[edit]

I have been in contact with the Writer's Guild - does anyone want to take this interview about the strike? I have about six interviews already this week I need to do. --David Shankbone 05:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Links...
That should be a good start on background. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I might be interested...I will have to read up on info though. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 10:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you are interested, you better get the contact info from David before he leaves for Israel. This strike is ongoing and as such its effects are beginning to spread. Have we had any coverage at all? --SVTCobra 00:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Senator w:Max Baucus[edit]

Anyone want to prepare a written interview with this U.S. Senator? Would be a good name. I'm in contact with his office. --David Shankbone 06:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been thinking of volunteering for this interview ever since you put it up. Getting a Senator, any Senator, is a tremendous "get". I am not at all familiar with him and would need to read up on him. What is the time-frame that we are working with? I'd like a couple of days to prepare, especially since it would be my first interview. Do you have a sense for how many questions they'd be willing to deal with? Are they concerned with "controversial" questions? (I've already learned that there was controversial tv-ad in his last campaign.) As a written interview, I assume we just submit a list of question and take whatever answers we get. Or is there a possibility of submitting follow-up questions after receipt of the answers? Thanks,--SVTCobra 22:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have started an interview prep. --SVTCobra 14:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you have questions for Max Baucus, please submit them here. I will take any and all questions under consideration. I seek to have this prepared by the end of Sunday (UTC). --SVTCobra 01:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So far, I have just gotten one question. By you I meant anyone. Post the questions here. --SVTCobra 00:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll post some this weekend. --David Shankbone 03:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update for anyone who was following this. The questions have been sent, but due to a heavy schedule, Baucus' office has said they can't address it until the new year. Since several of the questions were about legislation that may be addressed during this session of Congress, I may ask them to consider an updated interview questionnaire. --SVTCobra 00:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do we want to be a blog, or a citizen journalism site?[edit]

This is an e-mail I wrote FelloWikiNews, but I think it's bares consideration by everybody:

Hi, I switched back to the Unger story and I wanted to tell you why. Wikinews was originally started as a site for "Citizen Journalism." In the few months I have been on here, it mostly has appeared to me to be a blog. Looking at the stories that were written about the site, it was originally designed for us to go out and write stories ourselves. What the site appears to have become is a place where news junkies take MSM stories, whittle them down, and post them as original stories. That's more what blogs are designed to do.

The Craig Unger piece is ours. Nobody else's. We own it, and if people want a fairly in depth synopsis of what his new book about (he's no small potatoes, but a NYT best seller) we are offering them something they can't get anywhere else. The Black Sea oil spill? I can guarantee you nobody is coming to Wikinews to see how we took some MSM media stories, cherry picked some info out of them, and then posted it as citizen journalism.

I don't mind the blog stories because they make good filler. But they are nowhere near on par with original stories that we ourselves research and write, and they should never be seen that way. Otherwise, Wikinews becomes a blog, and a not very compelling one. So, I switched back to the Unger story as the featured story because it's about a very timely topic, about a best-selling author and major contributing editor, NYU Law fellow, who is currently on book tour.

The blog stories are uninspiring to contributors. We should be taking more risks at citizen journalism on this site and showing other people what they can accomplish. I feel I have been doing that. The blog stories say, "You can read the news and whittle it down for us." Why would somebody want to do that when that on Wikinews when they can do that on Wikipedia and have more readers?

At times I feel this project should do some soul-searching, because taking MSM media stories and turning them into shorter versions isn't "citizen journalism." I'm one of the few on this site where most of my work is, indeed, the work Wikinews was originally envisioned to do.

And I write this noting that days ago I dropped in anyone's lap two MAJOR stories: Designing an e-mail interview with a United States Senator who is running for re-election, and contacting the Writers Guild of America about the writer's strike. Nobody took them. I am guessing that what the project really wants to be...is a blog. --David Shankbone 06:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm preparing my Andrea Muizelaar interview this week. I can't do more than one interview at a time. TheCustomOfLife 07:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I dug up some sources for the SWG interview; I don't know much about the organisation and believe this is more appropriate for someone in the U.S. to pick up.
Right now I've been hooked into a few other things. I've been added to the press queue on OTRS, so I'm helping the Communications Committee field enquiries from the press. This means another mailing list to subscribe to, where plans are afoot to do an "Edit Wiki" campaign in December as a sub-project within the Fundraiser. David, nobody is as prolific as you with original reporting, so to a fair extent you have a right to express your opinion. However, I'd take issue with accusing the rest of the contributors of effectively blogging MSM news. A barometer of what readers like can be found here, the DPL in use there will show most recently edited comment pages. The webcomics article is still generating comments, presumably due to blog postings on popular sites. Almost every interview you do David provokes comments - and compliments. The rest of us? I don't have OCD. ;-) --Brian McNeil / talk 09:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you missed my point, and took it too personally. It wasn't aimed at any one person. I don't have OCD, either. But it's amusing that I went through such a hard time trying to get credentials when few of us actually need them to do what we do. We currently are writing ten stories a day, and about one or two are OR. Few of us ever write OR. According to Alexa, we have steadily declined in readership and the big jumps tend to be over our OR reporting (e.g. Benoit). My only point is not to accuse, but to make us think: what do we want to be. Because taking MSM stories and whittling them down to a paragraph or two is, essentially, blogging and adds nothing new out there on the Internet, and is done by many other sites, and far more comprehensively. I think it's a fair critique, and accurate. --David Shankbone 14:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The OCD comment wasn't meant seriously, more as a sideways compliment on how much work you put in here. You do have a point that I was taking the issue personally, a discussion I had recently in IRC was that our current mix of output and the mini-projects being landed require a great deal more research. Personally I'd nix the audio and video efforts and concentrate on content for the site.
I have over 3,000 pages on my watchlist, so tracking that takes time - these are things you do pick up when you act as "Walmart greeter" and try and guide people into getting their first article published. Yes, 99% of the time it is them doing a glorified blog post on a MSM story, but any junior journalist is going to be working on making wire reports conform to his paper's style and editorial guidelines. Jimmy Wales stated when Wikinews was set up something along the lines of he didn't care if it was doing mostly techie stories. It hasn't panned out like that, and those ten or so stories we manage a day are always a grab bag. On the other hand what you call recycling of MSM content can make for a worthwhile read - as an example, this is something I did from MSM sources, although I would argue that from the perspective of your average U.S. citizen the Bangkok Post isn't mainstream.
Our current situation is such that we have a viable community, there is an ongoing reaction, but we've not reached critical mass. If we could clone you David and drop off a copy in London and one in Paris we'd have a wealth of content that was OR, but a lot of the people who have done OR are caught up in college studies and the like. Personally I've got more involved in Foundation-ey things that are aimed at making sure Wikinews sticks around. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with brianmc. We try our best and calling our articles "taking MSM stories and whittling them down to a paragraph or two." is not positive. Most of our articles don't use information from just one news source, the regular editors like brianmc or me use lots of news sources for information on events and make the articles even bigger than the news soures article. Some users slice down articles but most long-time users don't do that. Also, I didn't have a problem with you reverting me, be bold. —FellowWiki Newsie 17:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My point is, that's just blogging, regardless of how many sources we use. Besides, that's essentially what Wikipedia does. Regarding Unger: my issue is that I felt the judgment used with taking the article down wasn't particularly good. We can't always be positive when our points are negative, and it's hard to contradict many of the points I make. Without criticism, we will not improve, and there are some real issues on this site that I think question its long-term viability. People can get upset with me for pointing it out, but we're all intelligent and mine as well acknowledge the elephant in the room so that we can figure out how to improve. --David Shankbone 17:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) What the thread is meant to provoke is some assessment of our project and what we are doing about it. I can only go on personal experience here, but it's illustrative:

  • I had quite a fight to gain credentials, but many of the people who raised criticism don't actually use their credentials, whereas I do all the time.
  • One of our most popular stories, Webcomics, was held up for days and days, questioned as "news" and my removing a deletion discussion template (that had been removed once before) when there was clear SNOW against it being deleted was used against me in the Admin discussion.
  • One of our most popular OR stories, the Fat Acceptance piece, has been removed and argued against as 'We can't have every Wikinews story on Wikipedia articles" by Steven on the Wikipedia obesity article, by the Fat Acceptance paragraph, when it more than illustrates the concept.
  • A very significant OR story, the Craig Unger, was replaced as a featured story by a blog-esque story on the Black Sea oil spill; both were written around the same time.
  • Two significant stories--an interview with a sitting U.S. Senator and the Writers Guild strike--that I don't have the time to do but I have taken the trouble to "set up" nobody has any desire to take. I also raised on IRC that Lifehacker.com editor Gina Trapani is available for an interview.
  • I've been asked by multiple people to do more interviews, and I'm met with reasons as to why people can't do the interviews themselves.

These things make me wonder what we are, and what we want to be, and about our culture. And they are worth discussing, because taken together they indicate we don't really know what we are or what we want to be. It's not as much about the work that isn't done, but that the work that is done doesn't receive the support it deserves. And the people who do it are nit-picked at. As the Dutch Wikinews going under shows us, our placed isn't secure and with only a handful of contributors, if we are seen as a "mini-Wikipedia" it doesn't give much cause for Wikimedia to keep us around. We're not living up to our potential. Did anyone else read Sue Gardner's interview the way I did? Aside from the idea she is very unfamiliar with what we do, it also didn't sound like a ringing endorsement of what we are doing. --David Shankbone 15:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the comment about Sue. —FellowWiki Newsie 17:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Every few months we have this "WhereToWikinews" discussion, which is good, we need to think were we want to go. I agree with David that we don't really know, or at least have very different opinions about it.
  • The most obvious restriction we have is our number of contributors. Ideally we'd have enough to do what most newspapers do: re-write other sources (ie Reuters and AP) on World News, have a few of our own reporters all over the world covering major events like Sean Heron did with Heiligendamm, and have a lot of Original Reports from were we each live, like User:BrockF5 is doing from Taiwan. A good mix is important, I think: what David suggests is what most Indymedias do, and I'm not satisfied by those sites really because I also want to read the mainstream world news, not just what's in my backyard (does that make me a nimby?). If you have a mix you have something for everyone, so I don't think that when I rewrite MSM that should be frowned upon. I always thought that to become more popular, we need a good combination of MSM stories and on the other hand niche-stories, like the Webcomics story, and stories about Wikipedia, because we should be the world authority on Wikipedia News.
  • David, you say blogging is what Wikipedia does. But Wikipedia doesn't write news articles, they write in an encyclopedic style. If you want to know what's happening in the Pakistan-conflict, or what the new developments are in the Finland shootings, you're not going to read the entire WP article. Ideally (again), more Wikipedians should come here if they're interested in news. It's just unfortunate for us that our Big Sister was there before us and is so much more popular, while we are actually better suited for the job.
  • I acknowledge that there is currently an overemphasis on world news and a lack of respect for local stories/original reporting. The latter is what interests most 'common' people and what drives citizen journalism. I agree that we should strive for more original articles, but not exclusively.
  • About the main page leads, I think most people are rather tolerant towards what gets selected and if we want to avoid discussing about every lead, we shouldn't try and guess the motivations of other editors and accuse them of poor judgement. It's likely they just have a different view. I think it's a good starting point to discuss what kind of content we want, but what actually happens on the main leads is far less relevant, if I may say so. Anyway, I think you're essentially saying that the current guidelines for selecting main leads should be changed, because they favour World News (ie, something that matters to people in all continents, who have never heard of NYT bestsellers).
  • What happens on Wikipedia articles is even less relevant here, but everyone's invited to discuss it over there. I did that as a Wikipedian, not as a Wikinewsie.
  • That you are putting so many hours into Wikinews to create this landmark interviews is something I can't thank you enough for, but just because we don't do so many interviews, doesn't mean we're not devoted to Wikinews -far from it, I would say. Also, I'd like to remind everyone that there is more out there than interviews: you can actually go out into your cities and cover parades, protests, performances and other local events. Read through your local news: almost every day there is something about an upcoming event, why not go out there? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since we all have work and probably no time to read all this, I think every long discussion should have boxes like these, which anyone can edit as consensus emerges. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a wide-ranging discussion but I'd like to add a few comments about the "blog or citizen journalism" question.
  1. First off, we are certainly far off from the goal of 'citizen journalism' that was perhaps dreamed of when this project was conceived. I am sure they imagined millions of people contributing things that are happening in their town coming together to form the most up-to-date and dynamic news-source known to humankind. At present, that sounds like a pipe-dream, but who knows.
  2. Leaving the interviews and other OR out, I don't think that we are like a blog either. Blogs tend to have one of two things (or both) that sets them aside from MSM. Either they are very narrow in focus, like a tech blog that just covers Apple, or they are of a particular POV, like dailykos or other political blogs. We are neither. Although our coverage of news is spotty at best, the variety of subjects and the standard of NPOV, to which we hold eachother, sets us aside from blogs.
  3. More OR and interviews would be valuable, but in the interim, the other stories are more than just "filler" and boiled-down MSM. I am more proud of some of "my" articles that have come from me sitting in front of my computer, than I am of my OR (yes, I have a couple). I feel that my best work has been articles that gather and combine various sources to form a cohesive story that you can't find anywhere else on the internet. I go out of my way to track down press-releases and other direct sources to include quotes that are not in any MSM story. When possible, I also go out of my way to find free images to include in the story that is also not in any MSM story (this happens less frequently, but often enough). For these reasons, I find the "news-aggregator" aspect of Wikinews to be much more than "filler".
  4. On that note, if we were to drop these compiled stories, then we would cease to be a news site and become more like a magazine. We'd have interviews and original stories, about events that were anticipated and accredited wikinewsies planned in advance to attend. We wouldn't have news as it unfolds. Even The New York Times has writers that stay "home" and write stories from the newswires. I don't know if they call that "filler".
Well, that was my two cents. --SVTCobra 23:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to Sue Gardner, here is a quote from a Globe & Mail article they had on the Benoit story (from Watercooler): Ms. Gardner, who worked as a journalist in Canada for 10 years, recalled turning to Wikinews to keep abreast of developments in the Virginia Tech shooting on April 16 of this year while working for CBC.ca. "It actually was the first place that I went online because I knew that Wikinews, in effect, aggregates together multiple sources," said Ms. Gardner, who began working at the Florida-based Wikimedia Foundation on Monday. The aggregate news is what drew her to Wikinews. For breaking news stories, nothing impresses me more than seeing ten different people working on the article as it goes through various changes. The pace at which it happens and the quality of the final output is astounding. Those types of articles are a strength as well. Jcart1534 00:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article here has done more to turn Wikinews into a blog than anything I can remember. --SVTCobra 13:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion summary (if you don't have the time to read all the above):

  • Do we know where we want to go? What future content do we want for Wikinews? Aren't original reporting and interviews more valuable than rewriting mainstream news?
  • What will interest our readers?
  • Aren't our most popular stories, like the Benoit, Webcomics, the interviews etc. what put us on the map? Is there currently an overemphasis on mainstream world news stories?
  • ...
Discussion summary (if you don't have the time to read all the above):
  • Do we know where we want to go? What future content do we want for Wikinews? Aren't original reporting and interviews more valuable than rewriting mainstream news?
  • What will interest our readers?
  • Aren't our most popular stories, like the Benoit, Webcomics, the interviews etc. what put us on the map? Is there currently an overemphasis on mainstream world news stories?
  • ...

What can you do to improve this?:

  • Try to look for upcoming events near you, go out into the real world and write about them!
  • What people do you find interesting? Why not interview them? With all the big names being interviewed, there's no better time than now.
  • If you're lacking inspiration, look at the above topics, because now we've got contributors who are too busy to finish all there interviews, so you would be welcome to complete some of their work!
  • ...
What can you do to improve this?:
  • Try to look for upcoming events near you, go out into the real world and write about them!
  • What people do you find interesting? Why not interview them? With all the big names being interviewed, there's no better time than now.
  • If you're lacking inspiration, look at the above topics, because now we've got contributors who are too busy to finish all there interviews, so you would be welcome to complete some of their work!
  • ...

Wikinews on Wikipedia[edit]

Our ability to link Wikinews on Wikipedia is being called into question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Paul_Wolfowitz.E2.80.8E This is over the Craig Unger article; since he talks in-depth about Paul Wolfowitz and the Office of Special Plans, I linked it next to that section on Wikipedia. Now our ability to link is being raised as an issue. --David Shankbone 17:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I happen to agree that it doesn't belong on Paul Wolfowitz. If they say it doesn't belong on Craig Unger, then I'll be concerned. --SVTCobra 17:51, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why would it not belong on Wolfowitz? --David Shankbone 18:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, I could stand some community discussion and guidance on this issue. I'm open to it. --David Shankbone 18:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's very nice to hear. Do you mean a community discussion hear on Wikinews about Wikipedia, or not? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, does it belong on George W. Bush? Does it belong on the WP page of every person that he talks about? I just don't think so. Unger does have a certain POV and we really just have his word for the "painstaking" research that is behind what he says. --SVTCobra 23:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews and Wikipedia II[edit]

This is a discussion that we on this project should be a part of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Webcomic#Link_to_irrelevant_Wikinews_article. --David Shankbone 18:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see Bawolff chimed in ... also is it safe to say a compromise was reached by putting it in the "See also" section? --SVTCobra 01:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but only because the article was old. I don't like some of the 'tude I find on Wikipedia toward our work. But it was a lone editor raising the issue. The interviews will raise our profile on WP, and I wanted them to be "profile-raising" for this project. I also expected to run into some amount of controversy--what isn't controversial on WP--but I think some of the stuff is beyond reproach. We are talking to such high profile people now, that the idea that we couldn't quote their words from our project on WP is something I think Wikimedia Foundation would raise concerns about. --David Shankbone 05:57, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hill Interview[edit]

I've been asked by Hill to remove some questions and answers in the interview and I would like to know how others think I should respond: [REDACT] Thoughts on removing these? By the way, nowhere in the transcription was it mentioned "don't include this" although there were parts where he said "I don't want to talk about this." --David Shankbone 02:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you tell him you were transcribing the full interview from the tape, and mabie he didn't fully understand? I don't understand. How could he/she/it say "I honestly didn't know this was an interview that was being transcribed from the tape"? Was that a lie? —FellowWiki Newsie 03:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be a real shame to remove these sections, but I am not in a position to say what is right. --SVTCobra 03:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's not very good of him to even ask you to remove what he said, because it puts your journalistic integrity at risk. He is so tied to his persona and his professional outlook that he fails to care that other people operate by the same standards, and journalism reports. I say no. TheCustomOfLife 03:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In defense of leaving the quotes in: These interviews don't work this way, and none do. If a person is in an interview that is being recorded, anything is fair game to be used and I happen to use everything, except things they specifically say, "This is off the record" (Unger and Burroughs both had notable off-the-record asides). For a person post-interview to claim that they did not want everything included is disingenuous--it's like a George Bush signing statement, with license to have things removed they think better of later. Always if something is "off the record" I comply out of journalistic integrity. These things weren't "off the record" and in some instances you see "I'll answer it saying..." Why someone would think something being recorded might not be used in an answer, especially when they are saying "I'll answer it saying..." is a little ridiculous.
In defense of taking them out: is it a big deal to do so?
This is an issue we all need to decide on because the interview has already been published and belongs to all of us now, so I don't feel comfortable making a unilateral move. Partly, I'm annoyed at the request and the way it was phrased almost in a "You should have known" way; partly I feel they have more at stake with their own reputation than we have in one of my more minor interviews; partly I think it's bothersome that parts of the interview that most flesh-out the person are what are being requested to be removed. I don't know. Input. --David Shankbone 03:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say if he full well knew this was an interview, for a news site, and was being recorded etc, then too bad for him. Its like having someone remove something because it makes them look bad on WP. From what I understand, if you are interviewed, its fair game. So keep everything.DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 03:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you (or anyone else, for that matter) just kowtows to removing any quote someone may not like about themselves, you have just forfeited your right to call yourself a journalist. That isn't what journalism is about, and maybe Mr. Hill can profess ignorance on that, but we can't. These interviews are not about people "who wish to play a part." And to boot, the questions that he wants removed aren't even that bad or damaging, nor are they libelous. It's not as if you published his female birth name, which I know for a fact he doesn't use ANYWHERE. The questions you asked were good journalistic questions given the subject, and maybe Mr. Hill needs to think about what he says next time he does an interview. TheCustomOfLife 03:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. If you slip up in an interview, then sucks to be you. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 03:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not so much that, but interviewees can clarify points before publish dates. That is, clarify, not ask them to be removed. If something should have been off the record, he should have indicated as such, like your past interviewees. Someone who's been in the public light for as long as he has should know that. TheCustomOfLife 03:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I said no. --David Shankbone 04:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We should however make it clear that if he wants to add some sort of clarification note he is entitled to do so. Just as newspapers allow the subjects to print pretty much any letter that responds to factual or other concerns in the article. JoshuaZ 04:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up[edit]

It's not clarification, but removal. I heard back from Hill (I plan to courtesy blank these sections once discussion ends):

[REDACT]

Personally I think you have two options here. Keep with the interview the way it is, or take the entire thing down. The whole interview. Either way your integrity is still intact. If he's going on about "further action," then don't even bother with it at all. To the contrary, it does have everything to do with your journalistic integrity. Considering the great work you've done with other interviews (and no offense to Mr. Hill, but you got people to talk to you who were worlds more high-profile than he will ever be), I don't think that's something you'd want to throw away. TheCustomOfLife 12:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My first thoughts on this is that, its an interview, what does he expect? Even if you were doing an interview just to get info for a feature story, you still might have quoted him saying something. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly right. And if I was doing a feature story I would have used that information. I think the issue is that "Murray" doesn't ever let his guard down and not be Murray. But when I interview people I tend to ask personal questions. It's their choice to say they don't want to answer them--Ingrid Newkirk did--but sometimes it leads to a very revealing and personally dynamic interivew, such as my yet-to-be-published Billy West, who by the end of the hour (ugh - transcription) said, "You're the Barbara Walters of the Internet." Murray's goals, and my goals, aren't meant to run in tandem. I go with questions, and if the interviewee does not wish to answer them, then I move on. It's a pretty simple formula. Having been to law school, I don't know what "further action" implies, but there's no legal recourse here for a recorded and transcribed interview. It's a pet peeve of mine, that people bitch about lawyers, they bitch about how litigious our society is, but they also are the first to threaten lawsuits the moment they don't like something. It's really a pet peeve of mine, and had Murray not thrown that out (I'm assuming he didn't mean having someone break my knees) then I might have been more conducive to more discussion. --David Shankbone 05:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ultra-local coverage[edit]

I've been chatting with someone who does a local newsletter/paper. Their news is ultra-local, so it'd need categorised off the main page, but perhaps listed in the appropriate country's portal page. With the upcoming "Edit Wikipedia Week" I'd like to see us work on some way of encouraging people who may not have an interest in international news to still contribute. I believe we should be able to cover something as small as a town's church fete - not appropriate for the main page - but news that would bring a local community to Wikinews to perhaps engage on the Comments pages.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Brainstorming session? --Brian McNeil / talk 10:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

we should probably look at how the quaker portal (used to) work, as parts of it were very local. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are probably many small news-websites that would be eager to join Wikinews and publish their stuff under our CC-BY-2.5 license. While it would be intriguing to recruit such sites (while keeping them under a local portal or newsroom), these sites are usually created with a very poignant POV. It would be very hard for people that are not from that community to monitor for WN:NPOV. My town has such a site that is very hardly bent against town hall, in particular the enforcement of parking regulations (hey, you brought up ultra-local). I don't think anyone not in this town could oversee their particular bent. However, if there are some websites that seem to be neutral/balanced, perhaps we could invite them to come on over, you'll get greater exposure here. It is a very interesting concept, though. --SVTCobra 01:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a 'not main page' tag combined with a list somewhere for NMP articles so that they can be checked by editors, or all NMP articles require an admin to remove the develop tag or something? anyway i think NMP articles would also be great to encourage sports reporting without it flooding the mainpage, if match results shorts were publish with such a tag.--82.45.210.78 20:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subsidised/Paid-for print edition[edit]

Further to my discussion mentioned in the above section the suggestion has been made to me that we organise an alternative version of the Print Edition with adverts that cover the cost of printing and distribution (free to a small community).

Are we yet big enough to be viable doing this? I'm thinking about people like NZGabriel and Brian getting local companies to pay for ads and they run a weekly edition. Key purpose of the advertising is to pay for hardcopy, any additional funds can go to improving whatever we end up with for the Wikinews "foundation", or towards improving Wikinewsie.org - which could become a site where we also solicit advertising for our print editions. If we can say "possible ad-supported distribution in xxxxx, NZ" or other areas, "Buffalo, NY"?, why not? We'd be looking for local advertisers for each "micro-edition", and if we really started to get more local coverage it could be a success. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the purpose, to get funds? I don't like advertisement, so I think it's a bad idea.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think our main problem is not lack of exposure, but lack of content. And the purpose of Wikinews is to be an online news site. Now I know that Wikipedia did some CD-ROM thing, but Wikinews is never going to be a printed paper. Having the print edition as it now exists is nice for people to print on their own, so they can read it on the train or wherever. So I guess I am saying No we are not big enough. But am I reading you right? Are you proposing that we put paid advertisements in a product of Wikinews? Like a local store could buy advertising space in the local print edition? Doesn't that go against the core principals of the WMF? --SVTCobra 01:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

America's Next Top Model past contestants interview[edit]

My Andrea Muizelaar interview is set for Sunday, so I am now working on a new project. I have contacted fifteen past America's Next Top Model contestants for an interview/panel discussion in real-time, on IRC. If you would like to collaborate, please go to the page and add your own questions. Broad questions can serve as ice-breakers, in which multiple girls can share their experiences. Specific questions toward certain girls are encouraged as well. TheCustomOfLife 21:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen you story/interview preps. As you refer to yourself in the first-person on the preps (ie I am setting up an interview), you should probably include your signature on those pages, just so people know who is talking. --SVTCobra 01:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Now three girls have confirmed they will do the interview. TheCustomOfLife 04:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seven girls have since accepted. I am going to give the rest until Friday to respond, and then from there I am going to work with who I have. TheCustomOfLife 10:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New user signup[edit]

Is the page presented to users following signing up with a new account editable?

I have a suggestion for that. I believe that it should also include an invitation for the new user to edit their userpage and tell us a little about themselves. Yes, I'm crap at finding my way round the Mediawiki: namespace. :) --Brian McNeil / talk 19:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yup, you need to edit this page --MarkTalk to me 19:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you need some ideas, there is a page on meta somewhere listing ll the cool things people have put in that page. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That page has a built in search, you just have to wait for it to be fully loaded. Matt/TheFearow | userpage | contribs 22:52, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The built in search sucks. Your browsers search works much better. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Top Model interview set for Sunday[edit]

Nine girls are going to be participating in the Top Model interview, Sunday at 4 p.m. EST in #wikinews-interviews. You may have noticed recent changes flooded with questions for the girls. The Wikinews Reports website was linked to many Top Model fan sites, and fans asked over 60 questions. I don't think this will be the last flood, either. Just be prepared because there may be more floods; apparently this is the most widely-anticipated interview we've done in a while, if ever. TheCustomOfLife 06:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shankbone goes to Israel for Wikinews[edit]

I will be representing Wikinews on an all-expense paid week-long trip to Israel beginning on the 15th. As a guest of the Israeli government, I will be reviewing the Israeli technology sector, taking tours of the holy sites of the Sea of Galilee, the Dead Sea and Jerusalem, and I have asked for--though no confirmation--an interview with either Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, or the Minister of Defense Ehud Barack (former PM). Absent those two, have asked for an interview with a cabinet minister to discuss Middle Eastern politics. So look for some Israel-related stories. --David Shankbone 21:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

may i say, sweet . Bawolff ☺☻ 07:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on this one, sounds like a real scoop to get. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just a few comments here on how you've worded this, it isn't quite right and could cause issues if any coverage you do is overly controversial.
    • You don't represent Wikinews - none of us actually do. We represent the Wikinews community; small but important difference.
    • I like the "shoot for the stars, but settle for the moon" approach. Israel is always looking for positive press so you never know how high up you might get in the government. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Got it; in my role as a Wikinews reporter, I will be going to Israel. --David Shankbone 15:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Would you like to blog that, I think that's something worth discussing on the Wikinews Reports blog.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible. What I may do is write stories every night in the hotel on the main Wikinews page. I actually have to do some work there for Wikinews, but it will be interesting. It may be Brock-esque, to a degree. --David Shankbone 22:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I ment: could you write on the blog how you got to go to Israel in the first place, who you contacted, what they are paying for, etc? Something like Wikinewsie David Shankbone going on Israel tour, just for the blog? The stories from there can just be articles of course. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not much to blog about. A friend of mine who is a well-known journalist was talking to the Israeli consular about the work I do on Wikipedia, and the consular suggested I join a trip organized for other journalists to Israel. Flight, hotels, travel within the country and dinners are paid for. Meetings are arranged with the heads of Israeli industry, as well as special requests. For instance, I've asked for the political interviews, and a guided tour of the Temple Mount for photographs. I may have the same situation come up in January with a trip to Dubai; I haven't said 'yes' to that, though. --David Shankbone 19:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right, well if the firewall on this desktop would allow me to acces the blog, I would write it on there, I'm sure a lot of people who read http://en.planet.wikimedia.org will be interested to hear this.
If you do say no (I can't think of any reason why you might do that), would you consider suggesting another reporter for the (ahum) 'job'? Like day DragonFire, although I'm sure BrianMc could also use a sunny holiday .
On a completely unrelated issue: have you met any of the other reporters from NYC, like Jason and SVTCobra, in person? Might be a nice mini-wikimeeting, no? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I posted a blog post about the Israel trip. Let's hope there are no snafus with my passport renewal on 12/5. It should be interesting. I will likely go to Dubai :-) It includes five star resorts and a helicopter trip over the Persian Gulf. I met Jason at a NYC meet-up, but not Dragon. He's all the way up in Buffalo. --David Shankbone 20:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? DragonFire1024 = Jason S. ? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to MessedRocker. --David Shankbone 21:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
MessedRocker is James H., DragonFire1024 is Jason S. DF is in Buffalo, New York which is hours away from NYC, New York and much closer to the Canadian border (for purposes of rapid escape. ;)) --Brian McNeil / talk 09:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was so close to going to the NYC picnic. I could have met both David Shankbone (before he even signed up for Wikinews and where his now-famous main picture was taken) and Messedrocker. How I regret that ... I think I did laundry instead (sigh). --SVTCobra 00:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David, this is fabulous news. I hope we will all be very proud of you ;-) Besides interviews, do not forget to take MANY free pictures.
I did not check, so just wondering. Do you belong to Wikimedia Israel ? If it is not the case, is it possible that you make contact with one of their members, and perhaps use the opportunity to "mention" that there is such an organization... If you see what I mean... free promotion :-)
have fun. Anthere 00:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a similiar note as BrianMc, do we know anyone active on he: that speaks english, that we could inform them about this? Bawolff ☺☻ 01:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiversity landing page[edit]

I've swapped a few emails with Cormac Lawler who is doing his Phd on Wikiversity. They have a small "school of journalism" which, among other things, lists us. I suggested to Cormac, based on some of his comments at the Amsterdam conference, that learning by doing was the best solution, and "please send more paramedics wannabe journalists". The idea came up, and I'm pretty sure it was Cormac's, to have a "landing page" for newcomers and potential contributors from Wikiversity. This would be a variation on our welcome with links to a "getting started" page with instructions on how to start out at a junior level and write an article from reputable third party sources such as the BBC.

Beyond that I think we'd need to be working with people coming in via that route with them documenting their experience of stepping up into original reporting and doing things like getting quotes to add to articles, digging up court documents, doing interviews, and all the other little things that people who've been around for a while take for granted.

Thoughts? I've asked Cormac for input from Wikiversity people - which may take time. Part of the culture shock a lot of people face when coming to Wikinews is the speed most people expect things to go at here. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cormac mailed me back, their page that people would jump here from is wikiversity:Wikinews. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

En.Wiki in Is.Rael[edit]

Hey guys. I met with the Israel consulate today and went over particulars. I'm going to really be taken around Israel a good deal, with guided tours of quite a few places. The photography will be some of the best stuff to come out of the trip. But I've been trying to figure out how to do stories on the trip for Wikinews. Apparently Ehud Barack, the Defense Minister, does not give interviews. Still in the running (with actually some decent chances) are Ehud Olmert, Shimon Peres, Benjamin Netanyahu and Tzipi Livni (reportedly the "next Golda Meir"). I may also be interviewed in the Israeli media about the trip. All of this is not sorted, but in process.

But when I was thinking about stories I could write for Wikinews, aside from the interviews, I thought about an "Israeli Journal" series. You see these in the news quite often. A reporter or a soldier or a citizen writes a journal about what they see and hear around them in a certain place. Would this be something we would want to do for the trip on here? --David Shankbone 02:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me that sounds cool, but we have to be very careful with WN:NPOV for something like that. Bawolff ☺☻ 04:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I think we could do it, especially if we have other editors reviewing the entries carefully. For that reason, I would only mark them "ready" instead of "publish" and have another editor publish it after reviewing. --David Shankbone 05:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Have a nice trip but take care. Outside politics, water distribution is also an interesting subject. Jacques Divol 09:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds fun :) I am jealous! :-P If you are interviewed David, would it be because you are a journalist writing for Wikinews, or being interviewed as a tourist etc? Just curious.
I like the idea of a journal type thing. If we can follow policy, I see no reason why we could not...but I see this as news as it is the first time a Wikinewsie will be reporting from Israel :) I just wish we had a better handle on Wikinews Video...this would be perfect :) DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 02:48, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, supposedly they are attempting to set up some interviews with me with the Israeli media, including the "Israeli Ted Koppel" - but I have no confirmation of anything. I had coffee with the Israeli consul last night who is supposedly setting up all of this, including guided tours of the tunnels under the Western Wall, the Temple Mount, and Tel Aviv (for photos all), in addition to the pre-arranged schedule. Yes, I would be there as a Wikimedian - Wikipedia (to expand some articles), Commons (photography) and...of course, Wikinews (stories). --David Shankbone 03:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Count me as a volunteer to copyedit and write introductions to your "Wikinews in Israel - Journalists notes" or whatever we call it. Just give me a shout by email or on talk when you've marked them ready. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Brian. What should be most exciting about this trip for all of us is the precedent it sets. Any work I produce from this trip is something other reporters here can use as an example of having Wikinews on such trips (they are quite common for journalists). The foreign ministry asked me if I wanted it kept quiet that they were paying for it, and I said no. I explained that any COI in having Israel pay for it is answered with the fact that other people would remove any POV in my work that is produced on Wikipedia or Wikinews, so it is not an issue. It will be something we can use to "shop" ourselves as worthy of inclusion on journalistic expeditions. --David Shankbone 16:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested input and collaboration from WikiProject Israel. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

calling all Kiwis[edit]

[11] looks an interesting story for an OR piece. –Doldrums(talk) 14:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marketing[edit]

I think we should form a group of interested editors who would like to work on plans to market our site and our work to increase traffic. A Wikinews:Marketing Department might be in order. --David Shankbone 15:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a good idea, because with my last two interviews, it was very much a "luck of the draw" situation. My first interview, with Andrea Muizelaar, was picked up by a lot of reality TV and body image news outlets/websites, and got a lot of readers. My Whitney interview, while I thought it was still good and had insight, flopped and wasn't picked up by nearly anyone. Traffic does need to expand, and for everything, not just certain things. If I can help in any way, I'm game. TheCustomOfLife 00:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it might help if we sent out emails to sites who might be interested in using our stories, with a contact person who might assist them in how to aggregate our stories.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you're interested in pushing along the marketing of the site, please comment on the proposals to get us listed in Google news over on the technical section. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We need to do more than just that, though. TheCustomOfLife 21:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful not to spam people though. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia fundraising blog and Wikinews[edit]

The fundraising blog currently had up a blog entry about Wikibooks [12]. Would any Wikinewsies possibly be interested in writing one about Wikinews? JoshuaZ 15:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous/Archive/14&oldid=4256523"