I speak from the perspective of an administrator in the Spanish edition. The fact that today Wikinews is not sufficiently relevantly, does not mean that in the future will be equal. The project has unique values and possibilities in the future may be successful.
It is true that even within the same community of Wikipedia editors we are treated as peripheral, but the success of projects depends not only on the internal work that is in them, but promotion we ourselves do it. And it does not depend on whether Wikimedia treat us well or not.
I hope that this fork is the result of the search for a project with clear objectives and specific goals, not the fight between a group of editors and other. If this is the case, however much success.
2011/9/12 MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com
David Gerard wrote:
Wikinews is still recoverable. But what it's been doing so far clearly failed. What can they do that would work? Open it up further?
Sage Ross once discussed with me the idea of having Wikinews be foremost a source of news about the Internet. It could report on news and goings-on on various Web sites. The idea made the idea of Wikinews almost seem redeemable to me, though I'm not sure how much it falls within Wikimedia's scope. Perhaps he'll chime in here to elaborate, as I'm surely not doing the concept justice.
If Wikinews had started as a site with news about the Internet and particularly online communities, I think it would've grown into a proper project over time. Instead, it primarily regurgitates news stories from elsewhere and outputs them under a free license, which there doesn't seem to be much of a market for. Some of the Wikinews interviews have been impressive, but beyond those, there isn't much to speak of after seven years online.
MZMcBride
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l