Talk:Wikinews interviews Asaf Bartov, Head of Wikimedia Grants Program and Global South Partnerships

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

I was invited to assist this Iberoconf, and in its last day I interviewed Mr. Bartov. Allan Aguilar (talk) 17:51, 5 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Review of revision 3077945 [Not ready][edit]

  • I also note, the lede does not really seem to be written for our general readership; one would really need to be a wikimedian insider to understand "How the Wikimedia Foundation supports regional cooperation initiatives like Iberocoop?" --Pi zero (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added an extra paragraph and links to the lede so it can be better understood. Also, I have sent an audio file with the interview to scoop. Allan Aguilar (talk) 17:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disclosure, COI-ish concerns[edit]

  • Did the Foundation pay for the reporter (Allan Aguilar) to attend the conference?
  • What, if anything, did the reporter do to "help out" at the conference besides doing this interview?
  • I do note, the interview has some feel of positive-bias to it, in the choice of questions.

--Pi zero (talk) 19:58, 12 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have completed the source-check, against the audio file sent to scoop.
After meditating on the substance of the interview, I sense that the interviewer was particularly interested in how a local chapter could interact successfully with Wikimedia. This is somewhat related to the difficulty (remarked on here and elsewhere) that the lede is not sufficiently explanatory for a general audience. The interest in the perspective of a local chapter would naturally tend to bias the direction of the questions in the same direction as a "promotional" bias would. It's something to try not to be limited by, for future interviews. --Pi zero (talk) 17:07, 13 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Based on the detailed contents of the interview, and particularly of the phrasing of the questions, I understand "invited to assist this Iberoconf" to mean funded to attend as a delegate from Costa Rica. After taking some time to consider, I've decided this adequately addresses my questions above, and no longer consider disclosure to be a hold-up to publication. I'm still not comfortable with the phrasing of the lede, though; considering further. --Pi zero (talk) 00:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I still can't see any way to resolve the "What on Earth is Iberoconf?" question non-Wikimedia-insiders will have at the end of the first sentence. Were this aimed at The Signpost, you're hitting a known target audience, with the clear expectation of the piece being relevant to them.
Wikinews is not aimed at that "insider audience"; well, at least not-specifically. If you look at virtually-all published articles they could stand alone, or be acceptable in a mainstream news source. To be honest, I think many other Wikimedians would look at this — as I still do — and read "Ibercoop" as 'Eye-Ber-Coup-P'; not as, after my repeated re-reading of the first two paragraphs clarifies: the "coop" component is being used as a contraction of the term "cooperative".
If it helps, something along the lines of "[...] interviewed the Wikimedia Foundation's Asaf Bartof at the <nth> Ibercoop — Ibero-American Wikimedia Summit; where, hosted by Wikimedia Argentina, the cooperative group of wiki contributors and supporters from former Spanish and Portuguese colonies met to [...]".
This then leaves the concern that an interview, when the audience is assumed to be non-Wikimedians, should have further exposition on what's going on, and why, covered in a handful of opening sentences.
However, I think working through the Wikinews interview form helps significantly; and, for a more-targeted audience the piece is fine. I've had similar concerns when I've been asked to write up wiki conferences I've been lucky enough to attend. Not everything can be made mainstream-accessible in the same manner as the Wiki loves parliaments events.
Apologies for rambling in the above, my sleep patterns are a bit 'off' and I've been up for the last 21 hours. Again. --Brian McNeil / talk 07:24, 14 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brian puts it well; the reason this has sat so long awaiting review is because reviewing it would be so tough. Pi zero told me via IRC the source-checking etc is done, which is great (I mean that sincerely), but in my view, the work to make this understandable to a broad audience is very substantial. I'm going to pull it from review. I did follow the link in the lede in the hope I could help with the work, but landed on a page that assumed I already knew where I was, and left more confused than I arrived. The good news is interviews like this stay fresh a while, so we can still fix this up and put it back up for review. I'm very optimistic this can be fixed. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 01:17, 15 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I tried my best to improve the lede, following Brian's suggestions.
Answering Pi zero's questions:
  • Yes, the Foundation paid for me to attend to conference, and just as a delegate from Costa Rica, not as a reporter.
  • I did not help out in any other way.
  • Sorry for that. I did not consider the questions carefully.
I'll be more careful in the future. Allan Aguilar (talk) 19:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Review of revision 3103338 [Passed][edit]