Talk:Porn star promotes Italian wine

News?

How does an article like this get posted to Wiki News? It's an obvious attempt to promote the winery, the porn star or both. The cited source story was undoubtedly generated by a press release or the writer's personal affiliation with the owner of the winery or the porn star. The idea that a story has value if it appears in a print publication and is regurgitated here is silly. I can see that Wiki doesn't want to become a dumping ground for thinly disguised advertorials, but every story in the realm of business is self-promotional. How about that Donald Trump - building a big building in Israel. Talk about self-promotion. (preceding unsigned comment made by Mcduffodonnell)

Not only that, I know there i not a "policy" about publishing with one source....but shouldn't that be looked into? I know this article is old, but has anyone really looked into this? Also note, we re the only 2 to comment on this talk page. Jason Safoutin 16:41, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

First, please note that is says to sign your posts using ~~~~ right at the top when you click to edit a talk page. It's really important that you follow this guideline, as it makes communicating with you much easier.

Secondly, people can, should, and are encouraged to post whatever they want. As long as they're willing to have it ruthlessly edited and butchered until everyone can agree on it. The Donald Trump article, for example, was total nonsense and I tried to get it deleted. However, there is a news story in Trump knocking down a building and erecting a new one. Not a great news story, but a story none the less.

You need to understand the process here. Good articles will float to the top, and generally bad articles will be edited into oblivion or just never published to begin with. This article was published because it is legitimate, PR scheme or not. The Trump article was never published (well, okay, it was unpublished) because there's not enough content to justify it.ironiridis 16:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

What exactly constitutes a "legitimate" posting to the Economy and Buiness section? The vast majority of "news" stories about companies and/or business people are by their very nature self-promotional and are generated by press releases and/or telephone calls from the principals to journalists. The notion that a story has legitimacy only when it's a regurgitation of an article appearing in some obscrue newspaper like the Australian is a ridiculous standard. I'm only suggesting that Wiki needs to eliminate the prohibition on press releases and focus on the newsworthiness of the posting instead. Mcduffodonnell 17:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Legitimate means there is a news story. You don't get to define that. There is also no "prohibition" on press releases, it just has to be non-copyrighted, original work. That means you take a press release and rework it into an original article.

Also, I hate to hit you with another policy thing, but it's considered extremely rude to edit someone else's comments on a talk page. Even if it's an obvious typo; let them fix it. irid:t 17:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Keep in mind, I'm not trying to jump all over you here. You just need to work inside the system for a while to understand how things get done and why policies exist. I know it doesn't make sense when some things are done and some things are blocked. It will make sense (or irritate the hell out of you) after a couple weeks actively editing. irid:t 17:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Appreciate editing advisory. I certainly won't correct anyone's spelling in the future. Personally I think Wiki's stated rule regarding press releases is pretty clear. I also think it's misguided. To say that a regurgitation of existing stories is "news" is ridiculous. (Before you go off on me, keep in mind that I'm talking about Wiki's news policy, not you.) Perhaps this is why so few stories get posted to this section.

'"Wikinews articles are not press releases. There are a variety of press release aggregators online who provide this service; check the Reference desk (or try News sources on wikipedia) for links to some of them. Wikinews articles address the 5 Ws and H where possible, and attempt to present newsworthy articles which are balanced and have multiple sources, which press releases by definition do not."'Mcduffodonnell 18:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The addition of other sources hardly carries any weight in this discussion. They weren't cited as sources by the "author" when the article was originally posted so to my way of thinking it makes their citation irrelevant. Mcduffodonnell 18:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

As I noted before, however, your job as an editor is not to simply regurgitate. If you find a press release that you feel deserves to be posted, find other sources, rewrite, perhaps do some NPOV'ing, etc. That policy isn't saying that all press releases are by default inadmissable, it just says don't just post it verbatim. Therefore, you crack your knuckles and give it that WN flair that we all so appreciate. irid:t 18:42, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Possible sources

Here are some additional source: [1] [2] [3] irid:t 18:15, 18 March 2006 (UTC)