Disappointing...
I certainly refute any allegations I "wasted" my time in writing this article. Although several reviewers accepted revisions throughout the day—to these people I am incredibly grateful—but as the only author (apart from some spelling mistakes I made corrected by other people, to whom I also extend my gratitude), I must say I enjoyed spending my day writing this. Since I am only a volunteer on this project, I choose what I want to write about and make no apology for doing so. There is a mixed verdict on the live blog from the community; personally I think it went very well. Whether the view of the community is that it was a success or not, I know I certainly did not waste my time writing this yesterday.
5 stars and a gold trophy for making an excellent point go to Dragonfire1024. I couldn't agree with you more if I was paid to agree with you. There were much better places to do this, Wikinews is not part of the blogosphere, and although done well, was done entirely in the wrong place. While stuff is happening elsewhere, we basically turned into a twitter feed. Volunteer or not, we're a news site, not a blog. If it'd been done as a news article, maybe not such a bad idea.
And so the Guardian, Metro, Channel 4 News, Telegraph, BBC, Independent, Sydney Morning Herald, Scotsman and NPR are also not news websites? I've said it before and I'll say it again: the live blog was a test for a new format which I thought would be more inventive than a simple article. If the community says they don't want me doing it again, I won't do it again.
I just want to say fantastic. This is a really good article - I thought that this was a credit to Wikinews! Well done Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 06:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)