The accusation that the main editor is a blocked (ex-)contributor to WP:NL is incorrect. I take it the person you're hinting at is De Wikischim. Well, I can tell you this: DW is a long-time Wikipedia editor with an improbably high number of edits. The problem with him is, in short, that he is unaware of his own limitations. He has a habit of voicing opinions and editing articles about subjects he doesn't know anything about, which causes irritation among several other users. Besides, he is overly present in discussions about policies, moderators and other meta stuff. At last, his discussion methods are not appreciated by many (constantly repeating the same arguments instead of answering questions, ad hominems, starting the same discussion elsewhere when he can't get his way, etc.). On the other hand, I should also mention that he is a good-willing, friendly and helpful person in general, with undeniable linguistic skills, and that the overall picture of his contributions to WP:NL is still a positive one. 

Apart from DW, I can see three others who are active on that project. One of them I don't know, the other two are unproblematic regular editors of WP:NL.

I don't care much for Wikinews and it is certainly true that the presence of DW will prevent some other people from editing there (although I doubt very much if that situation would have been any different without DW). However, about the people I know I can at least tell you that they are not likely to suddenly lose interest or something. From that point of view, I'd say: let the numbers speak for themselves. If there is a rule that says minimum X months of constant activity by at least Y users, and that condition has been fulfilled, then there is no reason to make an exception here.

Otherwise, I'd say: let's see how it evolves. If activity won't fade even during the next (half) year, then I'd give it a go.


2017-05-29 22:29 GMT+02:00 Oliver Stegen <>:

Thanks for making us aware of this.

I cannot say that I had a particular opinion to start with, especially not being familiar with Wikinews. However, having read some guidelines, particularly on content [1] and on writing [2], and then comparing that with the arguments in the discussion [3] and what has been posted on nl:wn/incubator (I do read Dutch!), I have to say that the case does not convince me.

1. the accusation that a significant amount of articles is simply copied from other news outlets (in violation of WN:OR) seems to be accurate.
2. the accusation that the main editor is a blocked (ex-)contributor to nl:wp seems to be accurate.
3. while this is actually the fourth month that the minimum of three editors have been active, the competencies needed to keep a distinctive Wikinews project running do not look promising in this little group.

All of this to say that I am not confident that this project will be viable if it leaves the Incubator. (And I'm not claiming that it would be viable in the Incubator either.) I'd be happy to be proven wrong and convinced otherwise, so I'm all ears.



On 29-May-17 21:08, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:

and there were different opinions.

I'm neutral about this matter. Does anybody in the committee have a particular opinion on it?

Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬


Langcom mailing list

Langcom mailing list