[21:06:54] * pizero claps xyr hands firmly, and counts how many times the echo bounces back across the empty chamber
[21:09:31] <MC8> ECHO
[21:09:32] <MC8> echo
[21:09:34] <MC8> echo
[21:09:35] <MC8> ech
[21:09:36] <MC8> ec
[21:09:37] <MC8> e
[21:09:38] <MC8> .
[21:24:04] --> BarkingFish has joined this channel (~thor@wikipedia/BarkingFish).
[21:26:16] <BarkingFish> Well this is a lively debate, isn't it?
[21:26:20] <BarkingFish> Where is everybody?
[21:26:40] <MC8> Oh, is it meant to have started?
[21:26:50] <BarkingFish> Yes, 20 minutes ago
[21:27:02] * MC8 got all the timezones mixed up
[21:27:04] <BarkingFish> 20H UTC is 21H British Summer Time
[21:27:13] <BarkingFish> it's now 21.23
[21:27:22] <MC8> Well, I actually got the 24h clock mixed up
[21:27:37] * MC8 has missed trains based on misunderstanding 24h clocks
[21:27:37] <-- wn-log has left this server (Remote host closed the connection).
[21:28:01] --> wn-log has joined this channel (~firstname.lastname@example.org).
[21:28:02] <-- wn-log has left this server (Changing host).
[21:28:02] --> wn-log has joined this channel (~wn-log@wikimedia/Microchip08/bot/Picochip08).
[21:28:02] *** ChanServ sets mode: +v wn-log
[21:28:51] <MC8> My contribution so far is to try and wrest control of #wikinews-en-admins
[21:28:59] <MC8> It's not working very well
[21:29:07] --> Badmin has joined this channel (~Sandman@wikinews/Blood-Red-Sandman).
[21:29:16] <BarkingFish> evening Badmin :)
[21:29:24] <Badmin> hey
[21:29:31] --> dendodge has joined this channel (~dendodge@wikinews/Dendodge).
[21:30:06] <BarkingFish> Anyone wishing to view the agenda for this evenings meeting, please go to http://enwn.net/492B0
[21:30:09] * MC8 needs to find a better log bot
[21:30:18] <BarkingFish> I know it's in the topic, but how many of us read it? :)
[21:30:41] *** You set the channel topic to "Welcome to the Wikinews Workshop! Everyone is welcome to make and discuss suggestions for improving Wikinews here. Please be respectful of others. | This channel is publicly logged. | Improving PR amongst other Wikimedia projects. How do we recruit more users and make ourselves more attractive for prospective contributors?".
[21:31:01] <dendodge> The agenda has one thing on it...
[21:31:20] <MC8> this is even worse planned that the bbq I went to last night
[21:31:22] <pizero> Stupid question: are we logging yet?
[21:31:30] <MC8> !help
[21:31:30] <wn-log> This channel is publicly logged at http://chippy.ch/logs – to say something off-the-record, say !off at any point during the message.
[21:31:30] <wn-log> Anyone can restart the (rather rudimentary) bot if needed; contact MC8 for details.
[21:31:45] <MC8> ^
[21:31:51] <pizero> Hm.
[21:31:53] <MC8> (yes)
[21:32:02] <MC8> If the bot decides to behave this time
[21:32:10] <Badmin> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Blood_Red_Sandman - I've been told of a specific user to possibly recruit
[21:32:14] <dendodge> !off I like cheese.
[21:32:56] <BarkingFish> Well this is a small turnout, let's hope we can make some use of the time.
[21:33:54] <BarkingFish> So, improving PR among other WMF projects. Funnily enough, I was discussing this last night with geniice in #wikipedia-en
[21:33:58] <dendodge> !off I propose that we add to the agenda: Tina O'Brien or Amy Pond? 9_9
[21:33:58] <-- wn-log has left this server (Remote host closed the connection).
[21:34:32] <MC8> bad bot
[21:34:40] <dendodge> heh
[21:34:52] <pizero> Laughter is good exercise, though.
[21:34:53] --> wn-log has joined this channel (~email@example.com).
[21:34:54] <-- wn-log has left this server (Changing host).
[21:34:54] --> wn-log has joined this channel (~wn-log@wikimedia/Microchip08/bot/Picochip08).
[21:34:54] *** ChanServ sets mode: +v wn-log
[21:34:56] * MC8 just stuck a link to here in the site notice
[21:35:00] *** ChanServ sets the channel topic to "Welcome to the Wikinews Workshop! Everyone is welcome to make and discuss suggestions for improving Wikinews here. Please be respectful of others. | This channel is publicly logged. | Improving PR amongst other Wikimedia projects. How do we recruit more users and make ourselves more attractive for prospective contributors? | Tina O'Brien or Amy Pond?".
[21:35:01] <dendodge> Is the meeting on hold while we wait for the bot to finish its tea break?
[21:35:14] <Badmin> I mean, uh, this is very serious.
[21:35:15] <dendodge> Oh, it's back :P
[21:35:17] <MC8> nah, I expect most people are logging in here
[21:35:30] <BarkingFish> Apparently, we produce what geniice refers to as "churnalism" - that is, taking everyone else's work and simply rehashing it when it's already out there.
[21:35:46] <Badmin> ...Like Wikipedia?
[21:35:47] <dendodge> Well, we do :P
[21:35:57] <dendodge> We need OR, and lots of it.
[21:36:04] <BarkingFish> This is one of the reasons why Wikipedia doesn't view us in a very good light.
[21:36:20] <dendodge> Because we do what they do, but more reliably?
[21:36:26] <MC8> "Hey, come visit Wikinews! We vomit up other news sources under a free licence!"
[21:36:26] <MC8> ]
[21:36:29] <Badmin> Side-note: I have major OR in the works, but for legal reasons exactly what cannot be revealed yet.
[21:36:56] <pizero> Quality OR is massive work *and* requires that you already know what you're doing (from writing synthesis).
[21:37:44] <Badmin> Well, a little OR is easy for many stories - think of someone at least tangentially able to comment, give their press office a ring or email.
[21:38:01] <Badmin> We should do more of that 'base' OR as well as the occasional major stuff.
[21:38:23] <MC8> BarkingFish: your bug went up to critical/highest, btw
[21:38:29] <BarkingFish> yes, I saw
[21:38:30] <dendodge> We should be aiming to get some OR in ~75% of our stories, really.
[21:38:33] <BarkingFish> Max put it up there
[21:38:33] <-- wn-log has left this server (Remote host closed the connection).
[21:38:38] <pizero> It's easy for a veteran Wikinewsie to say it's "easy".
[21:38:43] * MC8 gives up with the bot
[21:38:47] <dendodge> Even if it's just, "Person X told Wikinews..."
[21:38:54] <Badmin> MC8: For the benefit of people reading the log some time later, please explain what bug.
[21:39:06] <BarkingFish> Anyway, just as an example, I'd like to show you 2 responses I got during the discussion - one from Prodego, one from Geniice.
[21:39:17] <BarkingFish> Prodego> BarkingFish: so should we link to the article published by professional journalists, or by people editing a wiki?
[21:39:17] <BarkingFish> <geniice> BarkingFish the problem is that wikinews' niche is already filled by blogs and indymedia
[21:39:18] <MC8> bugzilla:28685
[21:39:19] <Wikilink2_> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/28685
[21:39:31] <Badmin> lol blogs
[21:39:41] --> lustre has joined this channel (~jbeebz@wikimedia/fetchcomms).
[21:39:42] <dendodge> Since when have blogs had NPoV?
[21:39:47] <BarkingFish> Someone even suggested that the WMF should close Wikinews
[21:39:48] <Badmin> (that's about all I have to say about that)
[21:40:03] <pizero> *Bad* OR is easy, and if we encourage a lot of OR, that's what we'll get. Project standards will start down a slippery slope...
[21:40:13] <lustre> Someone tell me why a workshop is being held on IRC?
[21:40:14] <dendodge> Wikinews doesn't need closing. It just needs to be refocused.
[21:40:31] <dendodge> lustre: So we can discuss things quickly and easily?
[21:40:38] <lustre> Informally, then?
[21:40:43] <pizero> dendoge: Since never.
[21:40:46] <lustre> I mean, what exactly is the goal of this?
[21:40:52] <dendodge> No, it's formal in here.
[21:40:55] <lustre> Everything official will need to be repeated onwiki, anyway.
[21:41:00] <dendodge> Badsically, we discuss ideas.
[21:41:06] <dendodge> That's why it has public logs.
[21:41:06] <Badmin> This is why we don't listen to the criticism - because it's rubbish. We need *decent* criticism, and frankly we can supply much of that ourselves.
[21:41:10] <lustre> IRC doesn't hold weight, despite the fact that the WMF board meets on it.
[21:41:15] <dendodge> That's why it has public logs.
[21:41:23] <lustre> dendodge, it's still no excuse for onwiki discussion.
[21:41:25] <dendodge> People can read the logs, and then commend on what was said.
[21:41:32] <dendodge> *comment
[21:41:50] <Badmin> The feedback from the journalism students will be most interesting.
[21:41:51] <BarkingFish> well how's this for criticism
[21:42:02] <BarkingFish> "accept that wikinews can never do more than rehash the work of real journalists so it's utterly pointless"
[21:42:12] <dendodge> Yes, I'd be interested in what the journalism students have to say.
[21:42:18] <lustre> Wikinews was a horrible idea.
[21:42:20] <dendodge> We can do our own OR.
[21:42:24] <lustre> Who proposed it?
[21:42:26] <Badmin> Yeah, which is why we ignore most of it BFish.
[21:42:40] <MC8> lustre: andrea iirc, don't quote me on that
[21:42:40] <dendodge> lustre: The original proposal was from an anon IP.
[21:42:40] <Badmin> lustre: Are you here to do anything constructive?
[21:42:44] <lustre> Yes.
[21:42:45] <BarkingFish> The point is, Badmin - we shouldn't be ignoring it.
[21:42:47] <lustre> I have lots of criticism.
[21:42:51] <dendodge> Erik Möller refined it, IIRC.
[21:42:54] <lustre> Ugh, anons ruining life.
[21:42:55] <BarkingFish> I got a lot of suggestions last night.
[21:43:20] <BarkingFish> "We need to focus on OR, since mixing it with the kind of churnalism we turn out kinda devalues the OR aspect"
[21:43:31] <dendodge> We do need to focus on OR.
[21:43:37] <dendodge> I've been saying that for a long time.
[21:43:41] <lustre> It's hard when you only have 20 active editors.
[21:43:43] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Badmin
[21:43:45] <lustre> But yes, it's ncessary.
[21:43:50] <lustre> necessary*
[21:43:57] <BarkingFish> "Anyone with a couple of hours to spare could walk into a court tomorrow and pick up 5 to 10 newsworthy stories"
[21:44:03] <dendodge> We need to work on in-depth, collaborative, OR stories.
[21:44:14] <lustre> The problem is that no one likes reviewing long articles.
[21:44:20] <BarkingFish> dendodge: Well we saw one recently, the photojournalist deaths one.
[21:44:21] <Badmin> BarkingFish: That, OTOH, is a very good comment
[21:44:29] <dendodge> That's where the wiki model will be an advantage. Collaboration.
[21:44:34] [Completion] Possible completions: Badmin BarkingFish.
[21:44:36] *** ChanServ sets mode: -o Badmin
[21:44:42] <lustre> We don't have enough users to get the good stuff published.
[21:45:07] <Badmin> (well, not anyone. I can't walk to Edinburgh or Newcastle to get to a decent court)
[21:45:12] <BarkingFish> I think the etherpad experiment between AutisticPsycho, MC8, and myself was a good example of constructive, active collaboration
[21:45:17] <Badmin> (but I get the point)
[21:45:25] <MC8> It's something I'd like to repeat
[21:45:35] <dendodge> I spent two days in the local Mags once. The most interesting case was a lady who stole some ham from Asda.
[21:45:45] <BarkingFish> lustre: If the other projects would stop putting us down as half baked and promote our work, maybe we'd have more users
[21:45:59] <Badmin> dendodge: I said decent for a reason :p
[21:46:11] <pizero> I've suggested before we should have a model for collaborative review. Last time I got yelled at mercilessly for it. But big articles, like good OR, are exactly when this becomes most important.
[21:46:12] <dendodge> Yeah, the Mags hardly count.
[21:46:13] <lustre> BarkingFish: Agreed, but some users (well, mainly one user) has earned us a reputation for being rude
[21:46:27] <lustre> and that's why I've been told multiple times to stay away from WN.
[21:46:32] <MC8> lustre: that's something we need to rectify
[21:46:41] <lustre> We can't.
[21:46:46] <BarkingFish> lustre: there's more than one user, I can think of at least 2 and one of them is me.
[21:46:51] <lustre> There's so few users a cabal is inevitable, and has formed
[21:46:57] <lustre> BarkingFish, you're too new.
[21:47:04] <BarkingFish> 0.0
[21:47:10] <dendodge> It does seem to be the old people vs the new people.
[21:47:22] <lustre> I was told that WN is horrible two years ago.
[21:47:29] <BarkingFish> and I joined 2 years ago
[21:47:31] <lustre> near when I first started editing WP
[21:47:39] <lustre> well, you weren't an admin then :P
[21:47:43] <BarkingFish> no.
[21:47:50] <dendodge> Some, like MC8 and myself, have managed to cross the line and join the "cabal"—most newer users, however, give up and quit in frustration. I can't say I blame them, TBH.
[21:47:51] <BarkingFish> But I was still a vicious little sod
[21:47:55] <lustre> dendodge, WN has too steep a learning cuve
[21:47:59] <lustre> curve*
[21:48:05] <lustre> Wikis are not meant for writing news.
[21:48:07] <dendodge> It does. We expect too much from people.
[21:48:08] <MC8> it has a massive learning curve
[21:48:19] <Badmin> Indeed.
[21:48:27] <dendodge> We expect people to come in and be as good as real journalists right away.
[21:48:31] <BarkingFish> lustre: So why does Wikipedia include so much current affairs stuff?
[21:48:32] <dendodge> And that's never going to happen.
[21:48:42] <lustre> BarkingFish: more users
[21:48:44] <BarkingFish> Shouldn't they be dunking that in favor of writing an encyclopedia?
[21:48:46] <pizero> lustre: I did suggest a template to gentle the learning curve. Just haven't had time to pursue it yet.
[21:48:51] <lustre> people like adding more pages to their "created" list
[21:49:18] <BarkingFish> lustre: at the expense of accuracy, thinking stuff through, vandalism and general crap which people have to clean up later.
[21:49:22] <lustre> WN has less users, therefore more laziness, therefore less interest in cleaning up ugly pages.
[21:49:25] <BarkingFish> We do it the other way round, mostly
[21:49:40] <lustre> Even on WP, you see areas where it depends on one/two users
[21:49:48] <lustre> i.e., copyright cleanup
[21:49:51] <MC8> pizero: Amgine's quite anti-template; apparently shiny magic templates kill contribs
[21:49:57] <lustre> People hate the menial stuff
[21:50:00] <BarkingFish> We start by planning the work, collaborating to write it, checking it, verifying it prior to publication, THEN publishing.
[21:50:17] <BarkingFish> Wikipedia is simply : Publish it now, tidy up the cockups later
[21:50:27] <dendodge> We generally have articles "owned" by a single person. What we need to do is work *together* on stories. Whether that be with newer users, to gently introduce them to the process, or with established editors to produce our best possible stories.
[21:50:32] <pizero> This template would be a form for new users to fill out; they'd never see the template end of it.
[21:50:36] <lustre> oh yeah, ownership.
[21:50:47] <lustre> news articles are "owned" everywhere else.
[21:50:58] <MC8> tbh they're owned here too
[21:51:00] <lustre> That's why every other site has bylines. We don't. But it operates the same way.
[21:51:01] <dendodge> They shouldn't be "owned" here.
[21:51:14] <BarkingFish> dendodge: They're not always.
[21:51:19] <dendodge> They should be collaborative—that's the point of a wiki.
[21:51:20] <MC8> they shouldn't be in theory. But they are much of the time
[21:51:26] <dendodge> BarkingFish: No, they're not always.
[21:51:33] <dendodge> But they usually are.
[21:51:43] <BarkingFish> Someone starts a story, someone else goes in and cleans up the typos, copyedits the work, maybe adds something new...
[21:51:44] <dendodge> Exceptions are both rare and, usually, our best work.
[21:52:15] <MC8> BarkingFish: the majority is generally written by the same author though
[21:52:21] <lustre> pizero: we need an article wizard
[21:52:28] <Badmin> +1
[21:52:30] <MC8> +1
[21:52:33] <lustre> I've said it multiple times and no one helps make one.
[21:52:46] * Badmin lacks the ability
[21:52:53] <BarkingFish> I lack the concern
[21:52:59] <pizero> lustre: That's kind of what I'm talking about, only I'm going for a low-tech approach.
[21:53:16] <BarkingFish> We already have the "start a new story" thing in the newsroom.
[21:53:26] <lustre> that's not good for new users, though.
[21:53:39] <BarkingFish> It prepages the box with the necessary templates, all they have to do is type the stuff for the story in.
[21:53:41] <Badmin> Nobody ever looks at the newsroom, either. It's of limited use imo.
[21:53:42] <lustre> An extension would really be good, but I don't trust the devs.
[21:53:46] <lustre> I do!
[21:53:51] <lustre> I use the newsroom all the time :P
[21:53:58] <dendodge> I don't.
[21:54:02] <lustre> Do people really ignore it? I didn't realize that.
[21:54:06] <dendodge> I haven't visited the newsroom for months.
[21:54:07] * Badmin just uses RC
[21:54:08] <pizero> "start a new story" is only a step or two away from what I'm talking about, though.
[21:54:12] <lustre> I always have to check to make sure I'm not writing a duplicate.
[21:54:16] <BarkingFish> same here
[21:54:35] <Badmin> If we had more changes running through, Newsroom might be more useful
[21:54:36] <pizero> I check the newsroom mainly for articles mispublished.
[21:54:43] <BarkingFish> and I use the start a new story box too, simply because I forget which dang templates to put on if I start one normally
[21:55:00] <dendodge> I use the box, yeah ^_^
[21:55:01] <MC8> I generally start with the box on the MP
[21:55:02] <lustre> I've never started one manually :P
[21:55:13] <dendodge> I use the one on the MP, too :)
[21:55:14] <Badmin> Yeah, I use the MP box
[21:55:37] <dendodge> (On that note, Main Page redesign FTW)
[21:55:52] <Badmin> Fascinating though this is, however, we're drfiting more wildly off-course than an Adam Air flight.
[21:55:52] <lustre> omg yes
[21:56:01] *** You set the channel topic to "Welcome to the Wikinews Workshop! Everyone is welcome to make and discuss suggestions for improving Wikinews here. Please be respectful of others. | This channel is publicly logged. | Improving PR amongst other Wikimedia projects. How do we recruit more users and make ourselves more attractive for prospective contributors?".
[21:56:10] <MC8> (why the hell was that in the topic?)
[21:56:15] <Badmin> Yes, Main Page redesign. That's a better thing to discuss than who uses what box ;)
[21:56:17] <dendodge> Oh. Are we not going to discuss Tina and Amy?
[21:56:24] <Badmin> lol
[21:56:27] <pizero> No.
[21:56:41] <lustre> tiny > amy
[21:56:42] <Badmin> MC8: Breaking the ice, mainly.
[21:56:47] <dendodge> Amy > Tina
[21:56:54] <MC8> Badmin: as well as going into public logs
[21:56:54] <Badmin> Tina > Amy
[21:57:05] <dendodge> :")
[21:57:23] <pizero> *is* this being logged, still/yet/again?
[21:57:32] <lustre> anywho.
[21:57:33] <MC8> yeah, I'll stick it up manually
[21:57:33] <dendodge> Yes, it is.
[21:57:58] <dendodge> Anyway, back on topic...
[21:57:59] <Badmin> Well, yes. Everyone should be able to smile. I see no reason why there can't be occasional humorous exchanges in corporate meetings. Heck, even Parliament. Happier discussions are productive discussions imo.
[21:58:07] <BarkingFish> What is happening here is precisely what I raised at the last meeting. All the indians and no bloody chief.
[21:58:21] <lustre> can I ask HOW we fix our issues?
[21:58:21] <BarkingFish> Can someone please make sure when we have these meetings that a person takes control of them?
[21:58:34] <lustre> Because it just looks impossible due to how WN is structured.
[21:58:36] *** ChanServ sets mode: +v BarkingFish
[21:58:41] <MC8> there you go
[21:58:43] <dendodge> lustre: Does it?
[21:58:56] <lustre> as reviews are mandatory
[21:59:06] <lustre> and few reviewers review long articles
[21:59:09] <dendodge> What we need to do is get our established contributors working together, and with newbies, on collaborative pieces.
[21:59:18] <lustre> and long articles are better than short pieces of fluff
[21:59:18] <dendodge> And we need to get rid of mandatory peer review.
[21:59:22] <BarkingFish> MC8: I meant someone preferably with experience :)
[21:59:33] <dendodge> What happened to that doscussion, anyway?
[21:59:35] <lustre> dendodge: have fun with that, wasn't that being discussed two months ago?
[21:59:36] <MC8> BarkingFish: like?
[21:59:37] * Badmin wonders why the review problem prevents addressing all the other problems
[21:59:38] <dendodge> It seemed to just die.
[21:59:44] <pizero> Long articles are the ones for which collaborative review would be useful.
[21:59:48] <lustre> exactly--WN discussions always die.
[21:59:54] *** ChanServ sets mode: -v BarkingFish
[22:00:01] <BarkingFish> Like the people who ran the first one, Tempo and Amgine.
[22:00:17] <BarkingFish> neither of whom appear to be here, but it should be controlled either way
[22:00:18] <dendodge> Tempo didn't even turn up...
[22:00:25] <BarkingFish> for the first one?
[22:00:27] <MC8> heh, that's the hour up
[22:00:29] <dendodge> Yag
[22:00:30] <BarkingFish> I thought he was there.
[22:00:33] <dendodge> No
[22:00:34] <-- Badmin has left this channel ("Atmosphere not great in here").
[22:00:44] <BarkingFish> +1
[22:00:55] <pizero> Mandatory peer review is what makes us not a blog.
[22:01:06] <dendodge> If we write articles that aren't so time-dependent, then publication can take as long as it likes ^_^
[22:01:25] <pizero> Last week's atmosphere was *much* better.
[22:01:35] <-- BarkingFish has left this channel ("Disorganisation is only one step away from chaos.").
[22:01:36] <lustre> again: why are we using IRC?
[22:01:42] <lustre> that's what happens.
[22:01:51] <dendodge> Because it allows for real-time discussion.
[22:02:01] <lustre> real-time chaos, too.
[22:02:24] <lustre> WN->volunteers->not paid->lazy without consequence->not enough quality articles
[22:02:39] <pizero> Unfortunately, these workshops have an implicit premise that the existing arrangement must be bad, so bad atmosphere is probably an inevitable trend for them.
[22:02:46] <lustre> WN->quality->lots of rules->new users=confused
[22:02:58] <lustre> those are the two issues I see.
[22:03:17] <lustre> the review process and the complexity.
[22:03:25] --> Mattisse has joined this channel (~firstname.lastname@example.org).
[22:03:26] <lustre> collaboration is not hard, we have etherpad.
[22:03:27] <pizero> That's why I proposed to give new users something easier to do than write fully-fledged publication-quality articles.
[22:03:45] <lustre> briefs?
[22:03:49] <lustre> those died out ages ago.
[22:04:18] <pizero> I perked up at etherpad because it sounds great, but haven't had time to investigate it yet.
[22:04:57] <pizero> If it's still *another* different interface, that doesn't seem too promising, though.
[22:05:02] <MC8> hello, Mattisse
[22:05:17] <Mattisse> hello
[22:05:35] <pizero> yeah, hi Mattisse. 'Fraid things aren't going as smoothly this week.
[22:05:40] <lustre> pizero: it's easy
[22:05:49] <lustre> just type and don't delete anyone else's typing :P
[22:06:49] --> Tempodivalse has joined this channel (4a6b4e33@wikimedia/tempodivalse).
[22:07:01] <MC8> Tempodivalse: you missed the show
[22:07:12] <Tempodivalse> Have we started yet ?
[22:07:18] * MC8 blinks
[22:07:18] <pizero> Is it possible that IRC moves *too* fast, and we'd do better running these biweekly workshops on-wiki?
[22:07:38] <pizero> Isn't that the punchline of a joke?
[22:08:00] <MC8> Tempodivalse: it started an hour ago
[22:08:09] <pizero> "Ready when you are, C.B.", or something like that.
[22:08:15] <Tempodivalse> Really? I must have my time zones mixed up
[22:08:23] <Tempodivalse> I don't see the log bot in here, are we on air?
[22:08:26] <MC8> yes
[22:08:32] <pizero> Somehow or other.
[22:08:41] <Mattisse> This is not the topic. Just curious. Why is the main page being redesigned?
[22:08:42] <Tempodivalse> Well, a rather disappointing showing .. hardly a quorum
[22:08:52] <MC8> Well, you didn't turn up...
[22:09:28] <Tempodivalse> !time
[22:09:29] <Wikilink2_> Tempodivalse: UTC: 21:09:29 - San Francisco: 14:09 - New York: 17:09 - London: 22:09 - Brussels: 23:09 - Moscow: 01:09 - New Delhi: 02:39 - Hong Kong: 05:09 - Tokyo: 06:09 - Sydney: 07:09 - Auckland: 09:09
[22:09:56] <MC8> Mattisse: because it's old
[22:10:13] <lustre> Mattisse: look at any other news site
[22:10:16] <lustre> look at wikinews
[22:10:18] <lustre> uggggleeeee.
[22:10:21] <Tempodivalse> !time UTC
[22:10:22] <Wikilink2_> Tempodivalse: UTC: 21:10
[22:10:26] <Tempodivalse> mc8: wrong
[22:10:36] <Tempodivalse> it's started just ten minutes ago
[22:10:54] <Tempodivalse> Remember that the UK is no longer on UTC, but an hour ahead ...
[22:11:06] <MC8> "Next meeting at April 24 at 20:00 UTC."
[22:11:18] <dendodge> Mattisse: Our main page has been in place for some time, and is ugly and out-of-date compared to other news sites.
[22:11:26] <dendodge> We just need a change, is all :)
[22:11:47] <pizero> It's not *that* bad. I'm not opposed to some improvements.
[22:11:56] <lustre> it's too ... short
[22:11:56] <Tempodivalse> MC8, just because i'm not here, shouldn't mean the workshop can't take place
[22:12:08] <Tempodivalse> fetchcomms, actually, i think shorter is better
[22:12:16] <lustre> why?
[22:12:21] <lustre> it shows we have little content to showcase.
[22:12:22] <Tempodivalse> I'm a minimalist.
[22:12:24] <lustre> :P
[22:12:31] <Tempodivalse> We *do* have only a little content to showcase.
[22:12:37] <Tempodivalse> That's the point.
[22:12:41] <pizero> It has been taking place, though the atmosphere drove off one person.
[22:12:42] <lustre> yes, but we have to disguise that.
[22:12:51] <dendodge> Tempodivalse: Have you seen my design? It's only marginally different to the current one, ATM.
[22:12:54] <Mattisse> agree on minimalist
[22:12:58] <lustre> People don't want to read a news source that has little news.
[22:13:11] <Tempodivalse> Well, then they won't come to WN ...
[22:13:15] <dendodge> But we'll have no way to fill all the boxes you want, lustre.
[22:13:26] <dendodge> There just aren't enough recent stories.
[22:13:40] <Tempodivalse> Content has got to come first, imo
[22:13:44] <lustre> what do you mean, dendodge?
[22:13:59] <pizero> Remember when someone posted on the cooler that they always read Wikinews first, because it's the most neutral site around?
[22:13:59] <lustre> Tempodivalse: but we need to expand our reader base--and through that, our writer base.
[22:14:13] <Tempodivalse> we can have the most beautiful ever front page but it's useless if there's no stories to go around
[22:14:14] <lustre> that's half good.
[22:14:25] <lustre> Tempodivalse, yes, but we can have both
[22:14:28] <dendodge> lustre: We don't have enough news to fill the various boxes on your design.
[22:14:38] <lustre> you mean the country boxes, or the leads?
[22:14:45] <dendodge> The country boxes.
[22:14:53] <lustre> hmm
[22:14:54] <dendodge> There's never any news for Oceania.
[22:14:59] <lustre> that's true.
[22:15:04] <dendodge> Ever. Not any more, since all our Ozzies left.
[22:15:11] <lustre> well, somwhat
[22:15:21] <pizero> We've had several Australia stories just recently.
[22:15:33] <Mattisse> why did the ozzies leave?
[22:15:34] <dendodge> That's because of our journalism students, though, isn't it?
[22:15:43] <Tempodivalse> more stories = more readers = more contributors. It's that simple, really
[22:15:58] <dendodge> That was years ago. They just left. They used to be really active, and interest just faded.
[22:16:03] <dendodge> I'm not sure why.
[22:16:16] <lustre> hmm
[22:16:19] <Mattisse> why is an important question
[22:16:29] <lustre> dendodge, what about using topic boxes vs region ones?
[22:16:41] <lustre> We should at least be able to have a good number of stories to feature that way.
[22:16:46] <dendodge> I still don't think we could fill them.
[22:16:58] <dendodge> We usually have less than 20 stories in a week.
[22:17:08] <lustre> I wish there was a way we could rotate the more popular ones
[22:17:15] <lustre> but DPL isn't that smart, I don't think.
[22:17:26] <Mattisse> newbies should be treated better
[22:17:31] <lustre> i.e., the top two or three categories each week
[22:17:32] <Tempodivalse> Well, trying to disguise that we have a low output isn't the way to go, imo
[22:17:42] <lustre> Mattisse, yes, and making an article should be easier.
[22:17:51] <Tempodivalse> ^ and that
[22:17:52] <dendodge> We need to be honest, and say, "We're small, but we're friendly. Come and join in!"
[22:18:08] --> diegogrez has joined this channel (~email@example.com).
[22:18:12] <lustre> Tempodivalse: what can we do, though? news is visual--people won't read if they aren't used to the format.
[22:18:14] <Tempodivalse> Just make sure you live up to that
[22:18:14] <dendodge> Of course, friendly is an issue we need to work on :P
[22:18:33] <Tempodivalse> lustre: Write more stories.
[22:18:38] <pizero> Both of which - treating newbies better and making an article easier - are addressed by the "story form" concept.
[22:18:44] <lustre> Tempodivalse: i know
[22:18:51] <lustre> but I mean, why a wiki as a news platform?
[22:18:55] <lustre> it's weird.
[22:18:55] <Mattisse> but when a newbie writes a story and the reviewer fails, saying "read the style guide", that's not friendly or informative
[22:19:02] <dendodge> So we can collaborate on news stories.
[22:19:04] <lustre> Mattisse: that's the laziness issue
[22:19:09] <lustre> which is why no one reviews long articles
[22:19:21] <lustre> spam> Tornadoes damage hundreds of Missouri homes, force closure of airport
[22:19:21] <Wikilink2_> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Tornadoes_damage_hundreds_of_Missouri_homes%2C_force_closure_of_airport
[22:19:23] <lustre> review that.
[22:19:25] <lustre> :P
[22:19:42] <dendodge> What we need is for established editors to join in and help newbies with their articles.
[22:19:54] <lustre> laziness--no incentive
[22:19:57] <Mattisse> for example, do you ever post on the newbie's page, notifying them that their article failed and why?
[22:20:06] <lustre> also ownership, i sense people are afraid to "take over" an article.
[22:20:06] <pizero> Mattisse: using a story form would avoid failing newbies articles on most SG issues.
[22:20:07] <dendodge> Rather than just failing it, they should sit down and fix it, and try to guide the user through the process by example.
[22:20:29] <pizero> The story form would *also* bring together newbies and experienced Wikinewsies.
[22:20:34] <Mattisse> yes, I agree dendodge
[22:20:36] <Tempodivalse> dendodge: exactly
[22:20:37] <lustre> dendodge, exactly, although they would feel it's wasted if the noob never edits again
[22:20:57] <lustre> can we name some non-MSM sources that ARE successful, and analyze why?
[22:21:03] <lustre> like newser
[22:21:23] <Mattisse> There is almost zero personal interaction with a newbie who has submitted an article.
[22:21:49] <lustre> then again, newbies don't interact back.
[22:22:05] <lustre> they expect their writing to be perfect and don't check to see if the review passed--sometimes, at least.
[22:22:06] <MC8> ok, the first hour is up at http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:IRC_workshop/April_24,_2011&action=purge
[22:22:27] <Mattisse> suppose a newbie writes an article but doesn't know about the Newsroom?
[22:22:51] <pizero> And not checking back would *also* be partly remedied by a "story form".
[22:22:59] <dendodge> MC8: Hey, why am I pink?
[22:23:07] <MC8> dendodge: I thought you suited it
[22:23:07] * pizero does realize xe's talking to xyrself.
[22:23:16] <lustre> no.
[22:23:24] <lustre> i'm half listening :P
[22:23:27] <MC8> pizero: I was reading, couldn't think of anything to say back
[22:23:48] <pizero> MC8: Oh.
[22:23:50] <lustre> by story form, you mean a wizard thing?
[22:23:58] <lustre> or a "form of story"?>
[22:24:14] <pizero> A form, with some boxes to fill out...
[22:24:28] <pizero> Probably short boxes for each of the basic questions,
[22:24:43] <pizero> for maybe up to four sources,
[22:24:56] <lustre> yeah
[22:25:11] <pizero> and maybe a few further details.
[22:25:15] <lustre> we need that, but are we going to get it? no. because no one is going to figure out how to put it together.
[22:25:18] <lustre> that's WN for ya.
[22:25:20] <lustre> :P
[22:25:26] <Mattisse> aren't there ways a person could start contributing gradually, like at the other wiki sites, without starting off by writing a full article?
[22:25:33] <-- diegogrez has left this channel ("Fuckers.").
[22:25:52] <lustre> tempo, look at http://www.newser.com/user-grid.html
[22:26:07] <lustre> they get 3-5 user stories/day
[22:26:25] <lustre> we get around the same, I think.
[22:26:27] <pizero> Mattisse: I don't think so, other than many months of copyediting (which is what I did).
[22:26:40] <pizero> So I figured that should be fixed.
[22:26:41] <lustre> yet we just somehow seem more pitiful
[22:26:53] <Tempodivalse> hmm
[22:26:56] <lustre> Mattisse: WN is boring :P
[22:27:08] <lustre> copyedit or write an article or say random things at talk pages
[22:27:41] * MC8 edits for the community. (Most of) the community is awesome.
[22:28:16] <lustre> another thing:
[22:28:22] <lustre> users write random stories about everything
[22:28:46] <lustre> so a) no user focuses on a specific area (except like nascar1996) and b) we don't cover the BIG HEADLINES.
[22:29:07] <MC8> you can't force users to make certain articles
[22:29:11] <lustre> I know
[22:29:14] <pizero> Nor should we.
[22:29:22] <lustre> but that's one problem.
[22:29:33] <lustre> and how do we solve it other than getting more users?
[22:29:50] <Mattisse> i gave up on the big headlines because after I wrote it I would find someone else already had
[22:30:01] <pizero> We do get more users. But
[22:30:27] <pizero> it *can't* happen overnight, and if we tried to make it happen overnight we'd just wreck the things we do have going for us.
[22:30:42] <pizero> So we keep whittling away at the problems.
[22:30:53] <pizero> I'll tackle the "story form" this week.
[22:30:58] <Mattisse> why did users leave here? what happened?
[22:31:07] <lustre> people thought it was getting off topic
[22:31:33] <pizero> Mattisse may be talking about the Great Exodus of 2010.
[22:31:40] <lustre> oohh.
[22:32:00] <lustre> let's not talk about that >.>
[22:32:02] <Mattisse> what was that?
[22:32:06] <Tempodivalse> ugh
[22:32:06] <lustre> other than it was a dark time in WN history.
[22:32:17] <dendodge> There was lots of drama, and a few users resigned over it.
[22:32:21] <Tempodivalse> More than a few
[22:32:26] <pizero> Let's not spend the *workshop* talking about it.
[22:32:34] <Mattisse> it's referred all the time, but I don't know what happened
[22:32:53] <Tempodivalse> mattise, it's a long story
[22:33:09] <dendodge> The crux of it was the Matthewedwards fiasco. Search the WN:AAA archives for that name.
[22:33:29] <lustre> Mattisse: basically some shit went down and people were hella rude.
[22:33:31] <dendodge> We do need to avoid drama.
[22:33:38] <Tempodivalse> There were other facets that were nearly as bad too
[22:33:40] <lustre> and then it was all a misunderstanding and people got mad.
[22:33:41] <pizero> Note that Matthewedwards xyrself stayed, and became a reviewer.
[22:33:55] <lustre> largely inactive, now, though.
[22:33:56] <dendodge> Just when things get working quite well, we have a massive argument and everything breaks.
[22:34:10] <Tempodivalse> I know. The community hurts itself.
[22:34:11] <dendodge> It happens every so often in WN history.
[22:34:26] <pizero> There were issues of not assuming bad faith, though, and whether or not to assume good faith, and (really) reviewing standards.
[22:34:28] <Tempodivalse> 98% of the drama we have can be very very easily avoided by not being so brusque
[22:34:32] <dendodge> It usually involves an established editor and a newbie pissing each other off.
[22:34:51] <lustre> >_>
[22:35:01] <lustre> anywho
[22:35:15] <lustre> the problem with WN is that it's all volunteers, and it's a hobby.
[22:35:37] <lustre> you can't run a major news site on hobbies without a massive number of volunteers, like WP has.
[22:35:41] <pizero> I've got some ideas about replacing AGI, but I've hesitated to put them on-wiki until they're ready...
[22:35:54] <lustre> and you can't get volunteers without making it nice for them.
[22:35:59] <lustre> like yahoo answers.
[22:36:00] <Mattisse> but is nothing is ever discussed, then how does a newbie find out anything? Like me. I feel like I don't know what's going on here.
[22:36:14] <lustre> everything is dumbed down for the computer-illiterate.
[22:36:23] <lustre> Mattisse: WN needs a much better help structure, yes
[22:36:37] <lustre> and Mattisse you don't WANT to know about the Great Exodus thinger
[22:36:43] <pizero> Wikis run on *idealism*. Our idealistic vision is free, neutral, reliable citizen journalism. (Have I missed anything?)
[22:37:07] <Mattisse> but all the wikipedia sister projects are all volunteers
[22:37:14] <Tempodivalse> Well, i think the first priority (other than writing articles) is to foster a caring, encouraging environment for others
[22:37:48] <Mattisse> why do "established" editors hardly ever write articles?
[22:37:55] <Tempodivalse> For instance, in the last few weeks I had serious thoughts of just quitting again and giving up.
[22:38:28] <dendodge> Mattisse: Some of us (like me) are just too busy, while others (like Brian) prefer working on long-term projects.
[22:38:39] <Tempodivalse> Everything seems, well, futile. I hate to be pessimistic, but from personal observations a lot of other users feel the same way
[22:38:47] <pizero> Tempo: Yeah. And do it *without* compromising the idealistic vision. Believing one can do both is itself idealistic. And it's why I'm passionate about Wikinews.
[22:38:48] <MC8> right, I've logged up to 2130UTC, could someone do the rest?
[22:39:07] <lustre> Mattisse: you wonder why Wikiquote is horribly in need to cleanup, Wikiversity has major internal issues, and Wikibooks is less-than-half-baked?
[22:39:11] <dendodge> I've pretty much given up on writing for WN, since it's a lot of effort, and nobody will ever read it.
[22:39:15] <lustre> wikisource is half decent.
[22:39:17] <Tempodivalse> dendodge: same here
[22:39:41] <dendodge> And I'm so busy IRL—since I started college, I haven't had time for WN.
[22:39:42] <Mattisse> wikisource has a very pleasant atmosphere
[22:40:03] <lustre> dendodge: you stupid brits, getting into college at 16 or 17
[22:40:16] <dendodge> So between college and personal issues, I'm kept too busy to write articles.
[22:40:16] <lustre> Mattisse: that's because there's nothing to bicker over.
[22:40:36] <lustre> personal--girl/boyfriend giving you issues? ;)
[22:40:53] <Mattisse> what is there to bicker about here?
[22:41:16] <MC8> lustre: college != university
[22:41:24] <dendodge> lustre: I don't really want to say in a publicly logged channel :P
[22:41:45] <pizero> Wikinews is *exciting*. Because finding a way to reconcile higher quality demands with wiki-hood is the future of all the projects, and here we're on the front lines of that.
[22:41:48] <Mattisse> if editors here don't feel they have the time to write articles, how can you expect a newbie to?
[22:41:59] <lustre> MC8: oh lol
[22:41:59] <-- dendodge has left this server (Quit: Read error: Fell off the pier).
[22:42:13] <Tempodivalse> I don't really find wikinews exciting any more
[22:42:18] <lustre> dendodge has a girl/boyfriend? o_O
[22:42:35] <MC8> lustre: he wishes
[22:42:39] --> dendodge has joined this channel (~dendodge@wikinews/Dendodge).
[22:43:22] <dendodge> Oops. I sorta clicked the wrong button :P
[22:43:31] <lustre> hah.
[22:43:36] <lustre> [16:42] lustre dendodge has a girl/boyfriend?
[22:43:38] <lustre> [16:42] MC8 lustre: he wishes
[22:43:42] <lustre> Tempodivalse: doeds anyone
[22:43:45] <lustre> does*
[22:43:48] <Mattisse> why don't editors join to cover a particular area? Like on wikipedia - all the editors from India?
[22:44:04] <lustre> really, I only write stuff that's interesting to me.
[22:44:05] <dendodge> Hey, I said I didn't want it discussed in a publicly logged channel!
[22:44:16] <lustre> Mattisse: Nascar1996, for example?
[22:44:21] <MC8> Mattisse: I like the idea of a workforce, but the problem is getting them there
[22:44:26] <lustre> not enough users.
[22:44:27] <Mattisse> but that's true of all the wikis
[22:44:30] <lustre> depressing to write on your own
[22:45:22] <Mattisse> yes, like Nascar 1996
[22:46:22] <Mattisse> people from Australia covering Australia, etc.
[22:47:46] <pizero> When I've written, I've looked for a story I wanted to share with Wikinews readers 'cause they might not have heard of it. If that happens to be stories on one topic, fine, but maybe it isn't.
[22:48:18] <pizero> Never gonna get the big stories, that way.
[22:48:21] <Mattisse> there was an editor who said he was from china. He wrote an article that sat for days. I finally rewrote it and it was publish but by that time he was gone.
[22:48:44] *** ChanServ sets mode: +o MC8
[22:48:49] *** MC8 sets mode: +F
[22:48:50] *** MC8 sets mode: -o MC8
[22:48:55] <lustre> .
[22:48:59] <lustre> remind me what F is.
[22:49:11] <MC8> allow forward
[22:49:48] <pizero> A "story form" might also get established editors more into the habit of editing newbies' articles, and that *might* spill over into the non-form ones too.
[22:50:20] <pizero> (Is it just me, or do I sound like a broken record?)
[22:50:51] <lustre> no.
[22:51:06] <Mattisse> but if no one here is willing to write article, why should a newbie?
[22:51:14] <MC8> pizero: I like the idea of a story wizard, not sure how one could implement it
[22:51:35] * MC8 secretly enjoys metaspace more than mainspace
[22:52:08] <dendodge> Mattisse: I'm willing. I just don't have time.
[22:53:11] <Mattisse> there is something wrong that I don't know about.
[22:53:11] <lustre> Tornadoes damage hundreds of Missouri homes, force closure of airport
[22:53:12] <Wikilink2_> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Tornadoes_damage_hundreds_of_Missouri_homes%2C_force_closure_of_airport
[22:53:15] <lustre> SOMEONE REVIEW THTA.
[22:53:17] <lustre> THAT*.
[22:53:53] <Mattisse> reviewers don't review
[22:54:23] <Mattisse> the Tornadoes damage article is very good and it is well sourced
[22:55:54] <MC8> lustre: American Airlines needs local linking and/or added as a cat
[22:55:55] <Wikilink2_> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/American_Airlines
[22:56:14] <pizero> Mattisse, one piece of the puzzle you *might* be missing (I'm just guessing here) is how big a task peer-reviewing an article actually is. Everything on all sides kind of revolves around that.
[22:56:38] <Mattisse> Some one is finally writing Renowned Indian guru Ṡri Satya Sai Baba, dies aged 84 ⋅
[22:56:40] <Mattisse> I have been looking at that for days.
[22:56:51] <gopher65> crap. Forgot about this thing:P
[22:57:11] <gopher65> Lustre: I'm reviewing that now.
[22:57:20] <lustre> yay thankssss
[22:57:24] <gopher65> Is anyone else reviewing it? If they are, I'll stop, since I just started.
[22:57:26] <Mattisse> But reviewing an FAC or GAN is a big job too, bigger than reviewing an article here.
[22:57:42] <lustre> gopher65: don't think so, mikemoral said he would later if no one else did
[22:57:48] <gopher65> k
[23:01:28] <pizero> Mattisse: I expect the whole relentless-news-deadlines thing makes a profound difference.
[23:02:06] <Mattisse> but wasn't this site successful once?
[23:02:27] <lustre> yeah
[23:02:37] <lustre> last year we had tons of articles published each day
[23:02:40] <Mattisse> why?
[23:02:50] <lustre> there was a writing contest--lots of stuff
[23:02:57] <lustre> then users just dropped off the radar
[23:03:02] <pizero> More people, I'd say.
[23:03:06] <lustre> interest declined.
[23:03:20] <pizero> morale declined.
[23:03:37] <pizero> spiraled downward, actually.
[23:03:56] <Mattisse> why?
[23:04:26] <pizero> bad morale creates more bad morale.
[23:04:42] <Mattisse> most places on the web people are wanting to publish
[23:05:11] <lustre> idk.
[23:05:21] <lustre> this whole irc is depressing me
[23:05:39] <Mattisse> me too
[23:05:40] <pizero> this workshop has been super-depressing.
[23:06:01] <pizero> ...which is a morale problem. :-)
[23:06:45] <lustre> Mattisse: are you a reviewer yet?
[23:06:48] <lustre> if not, become one
[23:06:54] <lustre> we need active peeps like you
[23:07:03] <lustre> before you become disillusioned and leave
[23:07:05] <lustre> :D
[23:07:30] <gopher65> Well, more probably do what I do
[23:07:32] <-- dendodge has left this channel.
[23:07:44] <Mattisse> Well, I was turned down. Then I was nominated for check user. So I don't think I want to become one.
[23:07:53] <gopher65> Periodically have a week of activity, then stop for a month or two, then have a week of activity. It's a good way to avoid burnout:)
[23:07:59] <gopher65> And you don't get bored that way
[23:08:13] <Tempodivalse> well, personally i think this site isn't going to be a success unless it radically changes its editing environment
[23:08:25] <Tempodivalse> the status quo is not working. that should be painfully obvious by now
[23:08:30] <pizero> Burnout *is* a hazard, with a site this intense.
[23:08:33] <gopher65> If everyone did that, we'd have a more steady flow of articles, with two or three people a week writing/reviewing articles, instead of the current bursts of activity
[23:08:41] <lustre> pizero: make the WMF pay us? :P
[23:08:46] <lustre> we need /incentive/
[23:09:10] <Tempodivalse> A few days ago I seriously considered quitting. Sometimes I think I still will ...
[23:09:22] <Mattisse> how come people are willing to make hundreds of edits a day on wikipedia for years?
[23:09:22] <Tempodivalse> anyways ... too depressing :b
[23:09:34] <Tempodivalse> WP is more interesting, probably, and more rewarding
[23:09:39] <Tempodivalse> to them
[23:09:42] <pizero> idealism is the incentive. That, and getting one's high-quality articles published. (There's the rub: rewarding low-quality articles does no good.)
[23:09:52] <Tempodivalse> idealism isn't realism
[23:10:09] <pizero> No, it's not, and that's why it motivates volunteers.
[23:10:31] <pizero> I've experienced this on multiple projects.
[23:10:50] <pizero> You look into it, discover they're trying to do something impractical,
[23:11:22] <pizero> and think, "wow, these folks are really idealistists; how can I be a part of that?"
[23:11:37] <Mattisse> I sill don't understand why there aren't more Nascar types. This is an ideal forum for someone that wants news covered on a particular topic
[23:12:21] <Mattisse> look at wikisource. why isn't there burnout there?
[23:12:37] <pizero> No news deadlines.
[23:13:24] <lustre> also, proofreading is easy.
[23:13:38] <pizero> As an alternative to Tempo's sense that things have to change really radically, I think lots of things are somewhat out of whack, and it all adds up.
[23:13:40] <Mattisse> the deadlines are a problem. the two to three day thing. it means you have to wait until a topic has been out a few days and try to judge when it is going to go stale.
[23:13:52] <Tempodivalse> A project is only as stressful as you think it should be
[23:13:56] <lustre> WP gets more eyes than WN
[23:14:01] <Tempodivalse> We don't have to have stress if we don't want to.
[23:14:08] <pizero> Late review has been proposed, repeatedly.
[23:14:09] <lustre> if you think people will appreciate your work more = incentive
[23:14:16] <Mattisse> proofreading is the way newbie get into projects
[23:14:27] <lustre> b/c it's easy
[23:15:32] <Mattisse> wikisource is harder than here, as it is so relentless technical.
[23:15:41] <gopher65> Man Fetchcommons:). You really scoured those articles for info
[23:15:42] <gopher65> Heh
[23:15:46] <lustre> hehe.
[23:15:54] <pizero> proofreading is how I got into this project; but there isn't enough scope for it to support the number of new contributors we need to train up.
[23:16:05] <gopher65> I like how you put two and two together to come up with some interesting stats, like the "30000 homes still affected out of 47000". Good job.
[23:16:26] <lustre> it speaks volumes about how much a life i have on a saturday night.
[23:16:27] <gopher65> errr, residents, not homes
[23:16:28] <lustre> :P
[23:17:02] <MC8> saturday night I feel the air is getting hot (like you baby)
[23:17:15] <Mattisse> the Tornadoes article is really good. I tried to save it but thankfully Fetchcommons took over.
[23:17:24] * MC8 throws that in to make log licensing complicated
[23:17:52] <pizero> Mattisse: "Hard" does not necessarily imply the sort of time-oriented intensity we have here.
[23:18:56] <Mattisse> well, if the stress level doesn't work here, then maybe the timeframe thing should be modified
[23:19:14] <pizero> Late review again. Each time it's brought up,
[23:19:27] <pizero> Brian McNeil opposes it.
[23:19:37] <pizero> Not without a rational reason.
[23:20:08] <pizero> His reasoning, as I understand it, is that if you make significant changes after the "freshness horizon",
[23:20:17] <Mattisse> a couple of days ago, about six article went stale in one day. No one had reviewed any for several days.
[23:20:53] <pizero> ... you can't be neutral because you know what happened, and you're sliding into encyclopedia territory.
[23:20:59] <Mattisse> But "real" news sites do it all the time.
[23:21:21] --> Wackywace has joined this channel (~Wackywace@5e0c2187.bb.sky.com).
[23:21:26] <lustre> oh yes
[23:21:26] <Mattisse> But the first info out is often wrong.
[23:21:31] <lustre> We NNEEEEED an udpate system
[23:21:42] <lustre> it can be as easy as renaming to "UPDATE: [title]"
[23:22:13] <pizero> Update is good too, but we can already do that, sort of, can't we?
[23:22:21] <Mattisse> sometimes just after an article is published, the news actually gets covered but TOO LATE
[23:22:41] <pizero> Late review is about not slapping down newbies because they didn't get the article in shape fast enough.
[23:23:16] <Mattisse> you can just slap UPDATE on an article?
[23:23:28] <pizero> Not exactly, no.
[23:23:37] <pizero> You can write a new article.
[23:23:44] <gopher65> You can just update the article directly, as long as it has been less than 24 hours since publication
[23:24:11] <gopher65> If it has been longer than that, then it probably warrents a new article in any case. The new article can, however, reuse much of the background material from the old article
[23:24:23] <lustre> except then people have to re-review that old stuff
[23:24:29] <gopher65> And since it is using material from a Wikinews article, it can be just cut and paste
[23:24:35] <gopher65> Yeah, there is that problem.
[23:25:01] <pizero> If the new story is too different, you may want to make it a separate article even within 24 hours.
[23:25:08] <Mattisse> the first news out is usually wire info and copyies of wire info. Then after you write the article, interesting stuff gets published.
[23:25:20] <gopher65> What I'd like to see is some stuff on the talk page saying soething like: "only the first 2 paragraphs are new, everything else was copied from the previously reviewed wikinews article".
[23:25:27] <gopher65> That way we know what to review
[23:25:59] <Mattisse> yes, why is there no "collaboration" on the collaboration page?
[23:25:59] <gopher65> CNN does that kind of crap all the time:P
[23:26:11] <pizero> There can be.
[23:26:27] <pizero> (Is *this* being logged?)
[23:26:36] <lustre> doesn't have to be :P
[23:26:45] <lustre> unless MC8 is still puttering away.
[23:26:47] <Wackywace> Except last time a breaking article was updated - the sub shooting one - the whole article was essentially "two people were injured; no-one arrested" before an update was slapped on the end without updating theorist of the article saying essentially "one was killed and a sailor has been arrested". It's just embarrassing.
[23:26:50] <Mattisse> they all do it - the Guardian, Los Angeles Times etc.
[23:27:08] <-- Tempodivalse has left this server (Ping timeout: 252 seconds).
[23:27:09] * MC8 is logging, but I'm not planning to add pretty colours again
[23:27:14] <lustre> hm.
[23:27:24] <lustre> why can't we just buy the AP crap, free or not.
[23:27:29] <lustre> then we actually have /stories/
[23:27:31] <lustre> :P
[23:27:48] <lustre> or like the serbian WN
[23:27:55] <gopher65> SR wikinews sucks though:P
[23:27:59] <pizero> Mattisse: That doesn't keep us from aspiring to better.
[23:28:00] <lustre> they have the CC licensing agreement with the beta site
[23:28:13] <gopher65> Then we'd just be a mirror site, and I don't see the point to that
[23:28:17] <lustre> meh
[23:28:17] <Wackywace> Didn't someone ask the WMF about buying wire articles a while back?
[23:28:20] <lustre> true
[23:28:27] <gopher65> Then the 'pedians saying "why does wikinews even exist?" would have a real point.
[23:28:34] <lustre> Wackywace, if they did, there was shit about non-free content.
[23:28:50] <gopher65> Because I sure as heck wonder why serbian wikinews exists, since it is just a bot run mirror site.
[23:29:06] <Mattisse> I agree. there is too much wire stuff in the news as it is. no point in adding more.
[23:30:16] <Mattisse> much of writing an article is figuring out how to reconcile conflicting sources, as the breaking news inevitably is inaccurate.
[23:30:38] <MC8> gopher65: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects I dare you
[23:30:56] <lustre> please do
[23:31:07] <lustre> we can watch Brian protest
[23:31:12] <lustre> ;)
[23:31:28] <pizero> ...much of it is, if one already knows some other things that we know but most newbies don't.
[23:32:04] <pizero> I don't like the nasty edge to this workshop.
[23:32:39] <gopher65> Nasty edge?
[23:32:58] <lustre> meh.
[23:34:07] <gopher65> Serbian wikinews is literally a bot run mirror site. There are 0 articles from wikimedias. All they do is copy content from other sites. That's hardly project worthy of supporting.
[23:34:13] <-- Wackywace has left this server (Quit: Colloquy for iPod touch - http://colloquy.mobi).
[23:34:18] <gopher65> And I'm not going to lie and say otherwise just to be PC about it:P.
[23:34:26] <pizero> These workshops always had the potential to be a gathering place for discontent. Basically negative vibes. They seem to be more prevalent this time around. Not that some of this hasn't been great constructive stuff.
[23:34:44] <lustre> anywho
[23:34:48] <lustre> i'm off for summer
[23:35:02] *** lustre is now known as lustre|afk.
[23:35:12] <gopher65> Without dissent leads to discord, and discord leads to discussion, and discussion leads to understanding.
[23:35:18] <gopher65> -Without;)
[23:35:58] <pizero> thought you were headed for "leads to the Dark Side". :-)
[23:36:01] <lustre|afk> i meant supper
[23:36:04] * lustre|afk fails.
[23:36:17] <gopher65> And understanding leads to supp...
[23:36:19] <gopher65> wait
[23:36:22] <lustre|afk> haha
[23:39:08] <pizero> At what point does this "end"?
[23:39:10] <Mattisse> it feels like there are parents in the room. can't discuss anything in front of them.
[23:39:41] <gopher65> When everyone stops talking
[23:39:47] <gopher65> I think I came in when it was already over
[23:40:05] <pizero> What the log is for, maybe.
[23:42:22] <MC8> I'll paste the lot again