The second point is this one. A lot of the opposition on the wikinews project is related to * dividing community forces (stretching human resources) * reduced number of editors will mean less chance for npov * breaking news-pressure will push editors to publish quickly, while nearly 4 years of experience show us only time and number of editors allow us to approach npov. As best said by Maha_ts ''Establishing NPOV within the short time span required for news reporting will almost be impossible, to any degree of fairness and accuracy'' * fear of legal issues (consider setting up a legal team at the same time than wikinews) * and mostly, concerns on original reporting. So, overall, though I think the idea of wikinews is great, and should become a major hit, I think that we need - that rules be collectively worked on, so that concerns voiced by non-supporters are taken into account. For this, I hope that many editors join the future project so that we all work on it. - possibly to get some journalists involved in the project, so that we get more (or different) perspective. There are some journalists interested in wikipedia, and who would feel ready to discuss the project with us. Or even to join it. For this reason, and after several discussions here and there, given the controversial nature of the project and its likelyhood to get in the sunlights of media immediately upon its creation (contrarywise to wikipedia, which had time to polish before it become known), I would suggest that we try to contact some interested journalists and possibly have them join a sort of advisory board. What do you think ? Anthere __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com