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
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Is Wikinews an acceptable source for Wikipedia? The same reasoning that stops it appearing on Google News would seem to make it inappropriate for Wikipedia too.
It should be - if the article is about a week old. I've probably protected more pages than anyone else as part of Wikinews' archiving policy. When our stuff is 7-10 days old it should be fully locked down and no content edits allowed. With that policy and an open edit history I believe that when an article gets to the archived state it should be a credible source for Wikipedia - if not before.
There are a handful of templates on Wikipedia for linking to Wikinews articles, they serve in a limited way to advertise the existence of the project, but there is no {{breaking-help-Wikinews}} template to add to articles that are in the news.
Brian McNeil
If there is a policy to lockdown article contents after 10 days, why isn't it automated?
On Dec 17, 2007 6:54 PM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Is Wikinews an acceptable source for Wikipedia? The same reasoning that stops it appearing on Google News would seem to make it inappropriate for Wikipedia too.
It should be - if the article is about a week old. I've probably protected more pages than anyone else as part of Wikinews' archiving policy. When our stuff is 7-10 days old it should be fully locked down and no content edits allowed. With that policy and an open edit history I believe that when an article gets to the archived state it should be a credible source for Wikipedia - if not before.
There are a handful of templates on Wikipedia for linking to Wikinews articles, they serve in a limited way to advertise the existence of the project, but there is no {{breaking-help-Wikinews}} template to add to articles that are in the news.
Brian McNeil
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hoi, Who is going to do this automation ? Is this the functionality that has the highest priority or have other wanted features more gravity? Thanks, GerardM
On Dec 19, 2007 5:58 PM, Nathan Awrich nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
If there is a policy to lockdown article contents after 10 days, why isn't it automated?
On Dec 17, 2007 6:54 PM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Is Wikinews an acceptable source for Wikipedia? The same reasoning that stops it appearing on Google News would seem to make it inappropriate for Wikipedia too.
It should be - if the article is about a week old. I've probably
protected
more pages than anyone else as part of Wikinews' archiving policy. When
our
stuff is 7-10 days old it should be fully locked down and no content
edits
allowed. With that policy and an open edit history I believe that when
an
article gets to the archived state it should be a credible source for Wikipedia - if not before.
There are a handful of templates on Wikipedia for linking to Wikinews articles, they serve in a limited way to advertise the existence of the project, but there is no {{breaking-help-Wikinews}} template to add to articles that are in the news.
Brian McNeil
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I drafted what is the main part of Wikinews' archiving process, and I've yet to see a good justification for the removal of the human element in the process.
The basics are a final format, dealing with issues like removal of templates inviting people to expand an article, sorting sources newest to oldest, correcting minor typos and grammatical errors - basically a final polish on the article. Depending on who performs the article archiving and how thoroughly it is done there is almost always a decision that I doubt we could develop software to carry out.
Trying to totally automate the process would lead to rules where you had a link to [[United States]] meaning that the corresponding category was always added. That may not be appropriate, and when we can develop software that can demonstrate what we consider good judgement I'd be delighted to see the process delegated to it.
Brian McNeil
-----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of GerardM Sent: 19 December 2007 18:07 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia and Wikinews
Hoi, Who is going to do this automation ? Is this the functionality that has the highest priority or have other wanted features more gravity? Thanks, GerardM
On Dec 19, 2007 5:58 PM, Nathan Awrich nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
If there is a policy to lockdown article contents after 10 days, why isn't it automated?
On Dec 17, 2007 6:54 PM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Is Wikinews an acceptable source for Wikipedia? The same reasoning that stops it appearing on Google News would seem to make it inappropriate for Wikipedia too.
It should be - if the article is about a week old. I've probably
protected
more pages than anyone else as part of Wikinews' archiving policy. When
our
stuff is 7-10 days old it should be fully locked down and no content
edits
allowed. With that policy and an open edit history I believe that when
an
article gets to the archived state it should be a credible source for Wikipedia - if not before.
There are a handful of templates on Wikipedia for linking to Wikinews articles, they serve in a limited way to advertise the existence of the project, but there is no {{breaking-help-Wikinews}} template to add to articles that are in the news.
Brian McNeil
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
The way it was phrased, it seemed like everything was automatically archived after 10 days. A bot could do it, without taking up a significant portion of anyone's resources. It'd need to be a +sysop bot, however, I know on en.wiki that isn't terribly popular. If there is an element of judgement involved in each protection (I wasn't and still am not familiar with the criteria) then you are right, it can't be automated.
On Dec 19, 2007 12:22 PM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
I drafted what is the main part of Wikinews' archiving process, and I've yet to see a good justification for the removal of the human element in the process.
The basics are a final format, dealing with issues like removal of templates inviting people to expand an article, sorting sources newest to oldest, correcting minor typos and grammatical errors - basically a final polish on the article. Depending on who performs the article archiving and how thoroughly it is done there is almost always a decision that I doubt we could develop software to carry out.
Trying to totally automate the process would lead to rules where you had a link to [[United States]] meaning that the corresponding category was always added. That may not be appropriate, and when we can develop software that can demonstrate what we consider good judgement I'd be delighted to see the process delegated to it.
Brian McNeil
-----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of GerardM Sent: 19 December 2007 18:07 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia and Wikinews
Hoi, Who is going to do this automation ? Is this the functionality that has the highest priority or have other wanted features more gravity? Thanks, GerardM
On Dec 19, 2007 5:58 PM, Nathan Awrich nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
If there is a policy to lockdown article contents after 10 days, why isn't it automated?
On Dec 17, 2007 6:54 PM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Is Wikinews an acceptable source for Wikipedia? The same reasoning that stops it appearing on Google News would seem to make it inappropriate for Wikipedia too.
It should be - if the article is about a week old. I've probably
protected
more pages than anyone else as part of Wikinews' archiving policy. When
our
stuff is 7-10 days old it should be fully locked down and no content
edits
allowed. With that policy and an open edit history I believe that when
an
article gets to the archived state it should be a credible source for Wikipedia - if not before.
There are a handful of templates on Wikipedia for linking to Wikinews articles, they serve in a limited way to advertise the existence of the project, but there is no {{breaking-help-Wikinews}} template to add to articles that are in the news.
Brian McNeil
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 19/12/2007, Nathan Awrich nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
If there is a policy to lockdown article contents after 10 days, why isn't it automated?
Because it takes a whole 5 seconds to protect a page, and it's often best to have a human in the loop somewhere for sanity checking?
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org