Talk:"Avast ye scurvy file sharers!": Interview with Swedish Pirate Party leader Rickard Falkvinge
This article is a featured article.
It is considered one of the best works of the Wikinews community.
See the archived discussion.
Original reporting notes
This is based on two e-mails sent to me by Rickard Falkvinge on June 9 and June 18. The answers in their original form can be found in the first version of the article history. Questions were originally prepared on User:Eloquence/Pirate Party Questions.--Eloquence 00:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
License to download, well intreasting title may be technicly incorrect because if you expire copyright laws early, you don't license it, there is just nothing restricting you from dowloading/doing foo with it. A License suggests you have specific permission from the copyright holders to do it. (However I'm not that knowlagable about copyright laws and terms so this may be wrong, but that was my impression) Bawolff ☺☻ 01:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's based on the James Bond title "License to kill". Probably too confusing for people who have a deeper understanding of copyright. Any alternative suggestions?--Eloquence 02:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well most people (Other then me who looks for the technicalities) would get it I think. Its proably fine. Bawolff ☺☻ 17:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Someone remarked that "tacky" is a very loaded term to describe TPB's response to legal threats. I was thinking of responses like "I'm running out of toilet paper, so please send lots of legal documents to our ISP - preferably printed on soft paper." Is "tacky" appropriate here, or would another adjective be better?--Eloquence 15:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Just a Second, I have to read that... Bawolff ☺☻ 17:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd definitly say its tacky (However its extremly funny). Would be better if we could quote someone saying its tacky. Bawolff ☺☻ 17:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- I changed it to irreverent, but was sorely tempted to include a quote from the site. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Irreverent is great!--Eloquence 02:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- AFAIK, slashdot is largely based on number of submissions, as (a) means more editors see them, and (b) helps show individual editors that more readers are interessted. So I'd say that any active slashdot poster submitting their own version is helpful. I can only assume that submissions by new accounts and identical submissions are kinda ignored. Nyarlathotep 11:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I once submitted one interview as an anonomous coward and it got through. I think they use the same thing google does. Piegons! to select their stories. Bawolff ☺☻ 19:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Nice interview... Frankie Roberto 09:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! :-) --Eloquence 13:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Currently, I'm a bit unsure about the article title — particularly the part before the colon. We don't typically allow this for other news articles, it can be seen as sensationalist, and overally, it's corny. We should excise the beginning part, but the two-thirds after the colon is fine. —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 04:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- We do have the precedent of "In the land of the open source elves: Interview with "Battle for Wesnoth" creator David White". I think part of the problem is that Wikinews mixes news content with more magazine type content (detailed reports, interviews, etc.). While this interview still has a news reference point (the PB raid), the LibriVox and Wesnoth interviews did not. If we do want this type of content, I think we should consider accommodating it by structuring our Main Page accordingly -- with a newsie left hand side, and a more "in depth"/magazine style right hand side. Then titles like this wouldn't stand out so much. What do you think?--Eloquence 04:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- It's all good, headline too, I took a lot away for thinking on this article. Thanks Wikinews. -Edbrown05 05:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree - I think these kinds of articles should be allowed a little more scope due to their nature... R2b2 05:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Also, we'd need nother title if we ever interview him again. Nyarlathotep 09:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- May I add my thoughts. (Even though I´m late)
- I had a discussion with Eloquence concerning "In the land of the open source elves: Interview with "Battle for Wesnoth" creator David White". (See http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:In_the_land_of_the_open_source_elves:_Interview_with_%22Battle_for_Wesnoth%22_creator_David_White) Point: sounds like an add ...
- My main point is, that we are talking news here, which means that in the first sentences the W-questions (Who, where, when ...) should be involved.
- I do think, that we need articles like these, especially when they are written that good. Hence it might be a possiblity to follow Eloquences advise and split up the main page (if I got it right) into magazine-style and news-style.
- Yet this leaves me with the "prob", that I do want to have these articles also on newsbriefs. This "prob" was solved very good in the discussed article, because I just could skip the question it started with, and read the second sentence, which had all the info someone needs, who doesn´t know about the issue as such.
- This is why I think, mabye we don´t need the extra work of splitting the main page, but simply can agree on having the relevant info in the first paragraph, and by this offering the info under news. Because that´s what it is. (At least for me, and I understood Eloquence in percepting it the same way.)
- Still the question remains: What about the title?
- I do not see this "problem" with the title "Wesnoth". When it comes to "Pirate Party" I have to write: I like it a lot, even though it isn´t a typical news title. But on the other hand, it´s almost a "quote", and it´s cleary marked. Moreover it is followed by the info "interview with...". Hence I can live with that very well indeed. Gumboyaya 20:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
In the following passage, there is a smilie: "Following the raid on the Pirate Bay, and our tripling of the member roster, we don't need advertising. :-)" This is unprofessional. There are never smilies in interview transcripts. --Munchkinguy 08:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- I smiled at that severe little grouch over there once and I thought she'd fainted from ... actually, clueless why the person glanced away. -Edbrown05 08:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)