Only the English Wikinews has an accreditation process.
The policy is here,
Requests for accreditation go here, http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/WN:AR
There are also a few other pages which those link to. The Wikinews phone
hotline is one of the methods that can be used to verify credentials.
We have one contributor who takes people's personal details and makes up
laminated press passes that get posted out; in the past, this got a reporter
preferential access to NHL (hockey) matches and a seat in the press box.
What seems to have made the biggest difference though was the purchase of
domain and use of that for email addresses. This was
something I took upon myself to do and it seemed to have an impact in
landing my interview with Tony Benn and David Shankbone getting his Israel
junket and interview with Shimon Peres. It certainly looks a damn sight more
professional to have firstname.lastname(a)wikinewsie.org instead of some
hotmail or gmail address.
From a personal perspective, I'd love to see
Commons institute something
similar and have accredited photographers. An
alternative to having two
separate processes might be to move the Wikinews accreditation process over
to meta and work from there across multiple projects. We've had a number of
people from non-English Wikinews projects apply for accreditation with mixed
results. However, that being said it might be best if Commons hammered out
their own rules to start with - particularly requirements that those
applying had good equipment and demonstrated a dedication to the project and
a good eye for photography. From a Wikinews perspective it would be
fantastic were there a pool of Commons photographers who could be contacted
to attend events with an accredited reporter and cover said event.
If you've any further questions on WN accreditation, feel free to ask on or
off-list. There are problems in the majority of countries that work under
the Napoleonic code and official, government sanctioned credentials are
unavailable unless you make the majority of your income from your
journalistic pursuits. However in a recent case in Belgium brought against
an Indymedia reporter the judge threw it out and specified that the case
should treat the person in question as a journalist and go before a
different court and apply a different law. This is great news for all
citizen journalists in the country as the law in question has not been
applied - successfully or otherwise - for many years.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of David Gerard
Sent: 28 March 2008 15:41
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Cc: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Photographer IDs
On 28/03/2008, Adam Brookes <adambro(a)aebrookes.co.uk> wrote:
I very much doubt that the Foundation would be happy
with having the WMF
logo used in any way which may suggest that Commons photographers are in
anyway represent the Foundation. The Foundation have been cautious about
Wikinews accreditation process for this very same
reason. They want to
minimise the risk of exposing the WMF to legal repercussions.
Yeah. The problem is not making up a badge, it's all the legal issues
and project politics surrounding "accreditation".
Is there a nice page somewhere summarising how Wikinews editions deal
with accrediting reporters, which might serve as a comparison?
foundation-l mailing list