WikiNews Network, Audio Wikinews
Care to verify that you are indeed the same human as the "Ryan524" requesting admin privs on wikibooks? You could just respond here, using your wikinews account, then make a note of it over there. 188.8.131.52 15:11, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- yes that is me.--Ryan524 05:15, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Wikimedia has a strict policy that all software run on its servers must be free software. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be the case for Shoutcast. There is a Shoutcast-compatible server called Icecast. I think a good first step to switching the WNN to the Wikimedia servers would be for you to familiarize yourself with this software. We would also have to use Ogg Vorbis streaming instead of MP3 because of the MP3 patents, which make free software implementations impossible.--Eloquence 05:43, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Shoutcast is free, i am too cheap to pay for anything, if at all possible.--Ryan524 05:46, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- "SHOUTcast is Nullsoft's Free Winamp-based distributed streaming audio system."
- Please read the Wikipedia article free software I linked to :-). Shoutcast is free as in beer, while Icecast is free as in speech (source code is available for modification and distribution). The Wikimedia project community is built on the principle of "free as in speech" -- for example, you can't just read Wikinews stories on the site, you can copy them to your own, modify them, or even sell them. --Eloquence 06:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You asked me on IRC recently to comment on what would be necessary to make Wikinac an official Wikimedia project. My opinion is that, at the present time, the wiki software is unsuitable to build an almanach or any other structured reference work. A key feature of such an open database is the searchability according to different criteria; such as, show all countries with a murder rate higher than X, show the list of countries ordered by GDP, and so forth. Since the queries have to be user-driven, it is impossible to manually create and maintain responses to them.
The only way such a project can be successfully built on a wiki basis is to add structure to the previously unstructured textual content of a wiki page. I am currently implementing this; see m:Wikidata and m:Wikidata/Notes. If the implementation is successful, all the data in Wikipedia that is currently in so called infoboxes will be put in structured form in a central repository, and much more data could be added there. This would add the almanach functionality to Wikipedia itself, though a separate project might still be useful for information that is not sufficiently encyclopedic (I believe the central repository, much like the Wikimedia Commons, would probably grow into that project organically).
In other words, while I agree with your goals, I don't think Wikimedia should take on this particular task in earnest until Wikidata is implemented and tested.--Eloquence 11:58, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Audio Wikinews Scripts
You may have seen this on the water cooler, but if not, please see: Wikinews talk:Audio Wikinews#Standardized Scripting for Briefs and Full Reports --Chiacomo (talk) 2 July 2005 05:26 (UTC)
I'm attempting to start up a new edition of Wikinews, one with a simpler user contributions system at m:Wikinews/Start a new edition#Open English. The goals of this project would be to simplify the process of submitting articles such that anyone with no knowledge of the Mediawiki software or the Wikimedia projects culture can easily understand and submit an article, and immediately see it on the main page developing articles section.
If you would be interested in supporting this project I would be pleased if you would sign up at the Meta page.
Ryan, if you have a look near the top of WN:DR you'll see a link to the "deletion archives". Rather than just removing the section of a finished deletion debate, could you cut it and paste into the right archive? Ta Dan100 (Talk) 08:45, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
- ah, if ya would look...i do.--Ryan524 18:57, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Yo, dude, Skype me. :P -- NGerda 19:36, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
I believe I did archive it. Though I put it under July 25, the deletion date, rather than July 19. After your archival, we have two copies of the RfD under two different dates. If July 19 is correct, please delete July 25 --RossKoepkeTalk 18:41, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
You are an evil dictator
YOU BLOCKED A PUBLIC PROXY SO PEOPLE IN ANGUILLA CAN NOT CONTRIBUTE TO WIKINEWS
- I block vandals,as they should be.--Ryan524 05:18, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
New Main Page design proposal
Welcome back, it has been a while :). --Cspurrier 21:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- Too long...lol.--Ryan524 21:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
You mentioned a chat thing about WNN. Is it in an IRC chanel or do you have to use the web thingy. I'm not a member/have not contributed anything, but I would be intreasted in hearing more about how its coming along, etc, and might be listening in (If I'm by a computer when it takes place). Bawolff ☺☻ 23:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. Welcome back. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
This is a message to inform you that I have added every administrator to the Rfda section on WN:A. This is not personal and I feel as if the community, who did not have the option of voting for or against most of the administrators, should be able to choose who they want to be in charge. I also want to say that I value everyones work on this site and I know that everyone does their best. I hope that none of you will take this personally and I hope that all of us will continue to work together. Jason Safoutin 12:18, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Ryan, that's no reason to leave. The unfortunate thing about big news is that wikis cannot accomodate them. Take a break if you must, but you really shouldn't leave. Wikinews needs all the help it can get. It's a thankless job, but my goodness is it worth it just to see something you wrote on the main page -- it's like a statue. I would like to thank you for your contributions to Wikinews thus far, and I ask that you continue contributing. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 05:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- This is bigger than tonight, a whole lot bigger. Just ask around about WNN, I almost did this after that but I took a break, came back and then more problems, so I am gone for good this time.--Ryan524 05:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Ryan, I didn't mean to cause you suffering. One thing that is very nice about a wiki community is that you do not have to be responsible for everything. Sometimes it is just OK to let things be messed up for a while. If you want to fix something that is frustrating, you can always come back an hour later and clean things up — or not and let others deal with it. My message is that you are very valued as a contributor here, and I hope that you will reconsider your decision. -- IlyaHaykinson 05:39, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'll stand by IlyaHaykinson. During tonights breaking news, you didn't see me editing the article itself. I helped Wikinews in other ways, in the IRC channel, trying to bring together incoming news from CNN/MSNBC/Fox as well as other sites, and working together with the people from Wikipedia. After the storm died down, I went back and did my normal spelling, grammar, POV check. Until we get a system similar to 'Google Docs' (or anywhere else that has live multiple user editing), we are going to have this problem. Frankly, its what "makes Wikinews, well... Wikinews" terinjokes | Talk | Come visit the WikiBistro 05:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- I just had to sneak back real quick to see what else has been said...and you are all thinking too recently, what happened tonight was nothing more than a headache, and I figured when i stopped to think, their is no need to stick around, based on previous thing, mainly how the community instantly sconced at WNN, despite its potential. So I came to the conclusion that its best to leave, a conclusion I was bound to come to sooner or later, perhaps under less stressful circumstances, or worse. But this is best since my time can be better spent coming up with ideas that won't be instantly rejected.--Ryan524 06:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
- ah NO! I am leaving all wikimedia projects that I am a member on, why? see this! This comment was made by 184.108.40.206.
- Thats too bad. I'm glad you consider us not evil yet (: hopefully we'll be the google of wikis (although googles not all good, they're the best big company I know of). Do you have any opinions on what wikipedia should of (or should) done/do to change this? (out of curiosity more then anything else, eventhough the chance of them doing anything is zip, I find it intreasting as to what people think could be done to improve it. Bawolff ☺☻ 08:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Don't let the RFA crap get to you -- Wikipedia has long acknowledged that its RFA process is broken. I find all the bureaucratic nonsense of Wikipedia to be bullshit anyway. I personally find joy in taking part of article development -- that's what it's all about! Stick around, just keep working on them articles (because we need it!). ★MESSEDROCKER★ 12:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)