Brian writes:
Wikipedia is not, and should not attempt to be, a news source. If you can't accept that news coverage is incomplete and *not encyclopaedic* then you don't understand the differences between the projects.
I don't want to get dragged into a prolonged flame war on the subject, but I agree wholeheartedly with the philosophy that Wikipedia should not try to act as a news source.
Someone dies? The facts (date/time/cause) go on Wikipedia. The obit goes on Wikinews.
Speaking as a former reporter (and still a sometime journalist), I respect the distinction Brian is trying to make here. To me, the problem is partly enforcement (I don't want to add a new restriction on Wikipedia contributions) and partly user satisfaction. I think this is less an issue of project rivalry than one of simply trying to address how users actually use the projects. I know from experience that en.wiki users value the up-to-dateness of Wikipedia entries regarding breaking news. I think this particular user community (en.wiki) would like for that usefulness to continue, and I would be saddened to see a new class of edit wars start based on whether this or that addition should be in Wikinews rather than Wikipedia. What I would like to see more of is Wikipedia articles citing Wikinews as a source.
---Mike