Dan Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia seems to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with its encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason. Maybe the WMF should sort out the demarcation issues. JPS On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:38 AM Dan Garry (Deskana) &lt;djgwiki(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: not trying Wikimedia For things to might project. yes, _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia seems to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with its encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason. Maybe the WMF should sort out the demarcation issues.

Andrew It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies that make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand, Wikipedia is a success as a news-gathering operation. These seem inconsistent to me. However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward is to fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia. Is that right? JPS On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih &lt;andrew.lih(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: given make and celebrate https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Jennifer -- as you say, there is a contradiction here in the self-image and internal narrative of the projects and movement. A classic branding issue ;) * On the one hand, we lack clear, consistent language to talk about topical subprojects (what do you call 'the Current Events specialists on the major language Wikpiedias'? some obvious names have already been taken) * On the other, for the few Names that we assign to Projects, we overspecify what they mean ('Wikinews is original news reporting or synthesis, done on a wikinews.org site'). We propagate this confusion of identity to those outside the projects trying to understand them; which in turn leads to misunderstanding in the world at large, and fewer potential collaborators joining the projects: I was recently at a gathering of international fact-checkers. They all prized Wikipedia as a model for what rapid collective editing can accomplish; assumed wikinews and wikitribune were the best efforts to date of applying that to current events; and began an enthusiastic discussion about how to do it better. When I pointed out that Wikipedias did exactly what they were discussing, for the most popular news, this was startling and satisfying to them. However as there is no central cafe or village pump for current events editors, and what portals do exist are impossible to find for all but the most persistent, it is not obvious how to engage with them... This is a challenge of naming + identity that really holds us back: ways for people to form groups, projects, message streams; and channel, advertise, amplify, polish them; use them for flash projects and coalescence, for awareness and thanks. We have tried many small steps in this direction but have never made groups or hashtags work as simple, functional tools of alignment. SJ On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers < jennifer.pryorsummers(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: that is to its should properties. to know the https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html -- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Indeed, I am not a fan of Wikinews and I do not particularly see the project as in any way successful. However, if the project is shut down against the will of the community (I now mean the Wikinews community, or perhaps even specifically the English Wikinews community), I will ask myself whether Wikivoyage (I am active in the Russian Wikivoyage, where we have a couple of dozen active users) could also be shut down one day against the will of the community, just because we are not successful competing with the brands like Lonely Planet, DK, or Michelin, for example. Cheers Yaroslav On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:32 PM Peter Southwood < peter.southwood(a)telkomsa.net&gt; wrote: did the They discussion startling impossible engage ways in are a with truth direct minute we – https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html ?subject=unsubscribe> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Indeed, I am not a fan of Wikinews and I do not particularly see the project as in any way successful. However, if the project is shut down against the will of the community (I now mean the Wikinews community, or perhaps even specifically the English Wikinews community), I will ask myself whether Wikivoyage (I am active in the Russian Wikivoyage, where we have a couple of dozen active users) could also be shut down one day against the will of the community, just because we are not successful competing with the brands like Lonely Planet, DK, or Michelin, for example.

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 15:41, Yaroslav Blanter &lt;ymbalt(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: we example. I've not seen any proposals involving shutting down projects without community involvement, so hopefully you shouldn't need to worry about this. Dan _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Abandoning a project and shutting it down sends a message to all volunteers that their work could be similarly abandoned and lost one day.

The difference here being that it is not a professional system. If you mess with the crowd the crowd does not generally go where you prefer it to, it goes home. Other potential contributors see what has been done, and decide not to waste their efforts where outsiders can throw their work away. (outsiders meaning people not from the project that is being closed). Preserving as read only in another place is far more acceptable and indicates respect for one's efforts, even when times have changed. Internal deletion, change and general editing is a completely different issue. It is a given when you start. It is implied by CC-by-sa licence. Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andy Mabbett Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 6:50 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals] On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 15:31, Peter Southwood &lt;peter.southwood(a)telkomsa.net&gt; wrote: volunteers For some value of "lost" - it's likely, in this case, that all the content would be preserved, either by making the wiki read-only, or perhaps migrating articles to, say, Wikisource. Sure, things like some portal pages, templates and categories might be discarded, but that can happen to the work of any of us, on any project, anyway. We have a related, but different, issue at Wikispecies .Technically at least, that project is now (or could soon be, with a few tweaks) wholly redundant to Wikidata, and could be populated using Listeria-like scripts or templates, from what is held in Wikidata. The Wikispecies community vehemently resist this, and respond with suggestions that data in Wikispecies (held in a variety of templates, as well as much unstructured prose) should be what is edited, and should be used in a reverse of the above process to somehow magically populate Wikidata. So we continue to maintain versions of the same data on two (or more: Wikipedias and Commons also do their own things with biological taxonomy) vastly different projects, diluting the impact of all of our volunteer-hours. Anyone who commissioned a system like this in a professional capacity would be sacked for incompetence. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Abandoning a project and shutting it down sends a message to all volunteers that their work could be similarly abandoned and lost one day. Is that a message we want to broadcast? Cheers, Peter -----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Ziko van Dijk Sent: 17 April 2019 00:46 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals] Hello, Some years ago, some volunteers have proposed a new Wikimedia wiki. It did not turn out as expected. That‘s okay, the movement should try out thing from time to time. But this wiki should not be seen as an eternal obligation to be kept. Kind regards Ziko Samuel Klein &lt;meta.sj(a)gmail.com&gt; schrieb am Di. 16. Apr. 2019 um 23:56: and issue topical major date exactly Wikipedia me. is wrote: Wikipedia vast Wikinews that mismatch https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 4266 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Peter Our brand is already on it in these cases, and yes it would be sending a we I don;t think "discard" is right. The message would be "... but if it doesn't work out then we won't continue to waste your time and effort and our donations indefinitely". That's realistic. JPS _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

message - "We want you to risk your time and effort on our projects but we may later decide to discard everything you worked for"

Sad memories of Orkut, Panoramio, and all the unvaluable repositories of online knowledge that have been completely destroyed in the recent past, because they were doomed as uncompetitive by big corporations as Google. I seriously hope we don't go that way.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers < jennifer.pryorsummers(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: that is As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than primary source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily. I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no. [1] https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel to Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia editors are already doing a stellar job. Andrew its should properties. to know the https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html -- -Andrew Lih Author of The Wikipedia Revolution US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016) Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015) Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American University, Columbia University, USC --- Email: andrew(a)andrewlih.com WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth: I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no. [1] https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel Me too. In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done very well. It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use for a Wiki. A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine addition to the ecosystem, imho. And it is very reasonable to think that given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill that spot. But a news competitor to traditional news outlets? Nope, that it isn't. Philippe On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih &lt;andrew.lih(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact check answers... and that’s off the top of my head. That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success stories, but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many roles for community there. On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk &lt;zvandijk(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: -- Philippe Beaudette philippe(a)beaudette.me

Hello Philippe, Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean. Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do) collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals (which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is). Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast". Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to "euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access to the world that has to be described. That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we don't need (another) website offering this. Another example for content unsuitable for wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography. An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to far here. Kind regards Ziko Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette &lt;philippe(a)beaudette.me&gt;me>: stories, roles wrote: direct https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel done functional, use fine that fill isn't. wrote: policies inconsistent to with https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel Wikipedia consistent WMF the policies should as reality origins of https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html ?subject=unsubscribe> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, ?subject=unsubscribe> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Yaroslav I think you have identified an important point -- I hestitate to call it a problem -- about Commons. We are dependent on the authority of the uploader of an image, say, to say what it is an image of. If they say it is a certain locality, or object, we have to take their word for it (or not, of course). That doesn't fit too well with the requirement on other projects for citation of reliable independent sources. Jennifer On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:34 AM Yaroslav Blanter &lt;ymbalt(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

It would be nice if more Commons images HAD proper location and context info. As it is experts are often needed to identify meaningful content and categories. Those tasks are not the equivalent of minor copyediting, not that proofreading is a minor matter. IOW, Commons *needs* more collaborative effort. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Hi Ziko, you could then argue that Commons is also not a collaborative project - only one person takes a picture (determines the story, the position, light etc), and others can at best perform some editing or add/remove categories. Cheers Yaroslav On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM Ziko van Dijk &lt;zvandijk(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

What are the examples of successful citizen news websites? What could we learn from them?

I feel I can give a relatively neutral comment on the part quoted below.

By 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the

În mar., 16 apr. 2019 la 12:38, Dan Garry (Deskana) &lt;djgwiki(a)gmail.com&gt; a scris: not the trying Wikimedia For I personally believe the law of the hammer [1] had a very significant contribution to the launch of Wikinews (as well as Wikiversity, Wikispecies and Wiktionary): "we have a wiki, what else can we use it for?" Stated differently ("we have a mission and an idea aligned with that mission, what kind of wiki would we need for that?") the outcome might have been radically different. Some projects might have never happened, others might have been years ago where they are now and again others might have happened later (e.g. a wiki does not seem a great fit for University courses, but Wikiversity might have happened anyway as part of the OpenAccess movement. Or not). It's a bit late to change history, but it's not too late to admit some of the projects are a failure in the current form and start again - or just drop them. As somebody else in the conversion put it "we must have ways to try and fail fast". Strainu [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument things down, to might project. yes, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

But it won’t be. Wikipedia does a fine job of documenting a great deal of news: in an encyclopedic fashion. On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:48 AM Jennifer Pryor-Summers < jennifer.pryorsummers(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: -- Philippe Beaudette philippe(a)beaudette.me _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Apr 27, 2019, at 4:44 PM, Strainu &lt;strainu10(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: They might just as well employ a bunch of journalists to write articles, it won't make it a successful project.