The second point is this one.
A lot of the opposition on the wikinews project is
related to
* dividing community forces (stretching human
resources)
* reduced number of editors will mean less chance for
npov
* breaking news-pressure will push editors to publish
quickly, while nearly 4 years of experience show us
only time and number of editors allow us to approach
npov. As best said by Maha_ts ''Establishing NPOV
within the short time span required for news reporting
will almost be impossible, to any degree of fairness
and accuracy''
* fear of legal issues (consider setting up a legal
team at the same time than wikinews)
* and mostly, concerns on original reporting.
So, overall, though I think the idea of wikinews is
great, and should become a major hit, I think that we
need
- that rules be collectively worked on, so that
concerns voiced by non-supporters are taken into
account. For this, I hope that many editors join the
future project so that we all work on it.
- possibly to get some journalists involved in the
project, so that we get more (or different)
perspective. There are some journalists interested in
wikipedia, and who would feel ready to discuss the
project with us. Or even to join it.
For this reason, and after several discussions here
and there, given the controversial nature of the
project and its likelyhood to get in the sunlights of
media immediately upon its creation (contrarywise to
wikipedia, which had time to polish before it become
known), I would suggest that we try to contact some
interested journalists and possibly have them join a
sort of advisory board. What do you think ?
Anthere
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com