I'll get them scheduled.
Joe
On 22 September 2015 at 01:59, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
That was exactly the perspective I was looking for! Given that it's good practice, can we get those posts scheduled for tomorrow?
--Ed
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Michael Guss mguss@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Ed, that is perfectly fine and is really a staple for "attention-grabbing" while simultaneously using the title of the blog post within the Facebook preview as complementary copy. I speak more from a social media/ marketing perspective, of course.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
We could probably just go with "Read this editor's advice first," as the previewed title will contain the rest, but I'm not sure if that's best practice for Facebook. Michael, Joe, your thoughts?
--Ed
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Juliet Barbara jbarbara@wikimedia.org wrote:
Ok, for FB what about:
Thinking about paying for a Wikipedia article? Read this editor's advice first.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
@Juliet, that's already in the title of the article which appears as a preview on Facebook. That works great for Twitter, though.
--Ed
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Gregory Varnum <greg.varnum@gmail.com
wrote:
I like that for FB and Twitter.
-greg
Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later.
On Sep 21, 2015, at 3:20 PM, Juliet Barbara jbarbara@wikimedia.org wrote:
How about something straightforward like:
Should you pay for a Wikipedia article? Find out here. [LINK]
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
> Hi all, > > This is now published after a snafu with WordPress' scheduling > mechanism. Further proposed Facebook posts: > > - "Wikipedia is, after all, an encyclopedia—not a commercial > directory." > - No, you should not hire a paid editor who does not disclose > that fact on Wikipedia. > > --Ed > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote: > >> I guess a further refinement: it can be free of financial >> obligation in order to participate in Wikipedia in many ways, but plenty of >> people and organizations are being paid for their involvement, so we need >> to be careful about the messaging. >> >> Pine >> On Sep 19, 2015 1:38 PM, "Pine W" wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> Agreed that we should drop any suggestions that everyone who >>> creates content or does other work is doing so for free. Wikipedia is free >>> (of financial obligation) as in free to read and share, not as in free to >>> create, store, maintain, defend, reseaech, and develop. >>> >>> Pine >>> >> > > > -- > Ed Erhart > Editorial Associate > Wikimedia Foundation >
-- *Juliet Barbara* Senior Communications Manager I Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105 jbarbara@wikimedia.org I +1 (512) 750-5677
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Associate Wikimedia Foundation
-- *Juliet Barbara* Senior Communications Manager I Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105 jbarbara@wikimedia.org I +1 (512) 750-5677
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Associate Wikimedia Foundation
-- Michael Guss Research Analyst Wikimediafoundation.org mguss@wikimedia.org
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Associate Wikimedia Foundation