Hi all,

Recently, I have decided that it was time I adopt a new project. A small one :-)

So, I started participating to wikinews in french.

It is quite a challenge I must say, because there are a handful of very nice participants... but most of them are not participants to wikipedia, so quite newbies on some issues. On the other hand, plenty of motivation and ideas which is good :-)

Still, today, I have something disturbing me a little bit. A new main page was set up this morning; Looking at it, I realised the html was probably not standard (some wrong columns size or locations) and saw that some areas were just empty (for example, it did not mention other projects or other languages).

So it appeared to me to be a working stage, and it did not seem a good idea to make changes live; So I reverted the page to yesterday version and moved the new version to a temp page : http://fr.wikinews.org/wiki/Discuter:Accueil/temp

I then was told this version had been approved and the vote ended yesterday. So, it should be the main page in any cases.

Then, to list the problems of the html, I looked more precisely at it. And I discovered 3 new sections.

One is the "Analysis section". There is one example of it, the link being a user sub page. So, first, it means it is very likely a non editable page (since it is a user sub page). Second, there is a mention below, stating "the section can be ambiguous in terms of NPOV, as it is only partially submitted to it"

Two other sections are "Editorial" and "carte blanche" (I am not sure I really see the difference). These sections are empty for now, and a note indicates "These two sections do not respect NPOV and have not been adopted by the community".

I then commented in saying that these sections should probably not be here in any cases, since NOT adopted by the community. I was answered they actually were adopted, so the little text should be modified, but they should be on the main page.

I looked for a discussion, and found this http://fr.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews%3ASalle_caf%C3%A9#PDV_.21.21

So, to me, a site with 1) articles submitted to NPOV, 2) personal analyses only partially submitted to NPOV and not editable, and 3) editorials not submitted to NPVO has a name, Indymedia. Not wikinews :-)

And I do not agree. I think all wikimedia projects should adhere to NPOV. Strictly. As much as we can.

But I then thought I had no idea what other wikinews have been doing on this issue and that possibly some of them have adopted editorials (which will quite naturally report a pov). Is this the case ? If so, how did you organise yourself to explain readers the difference between the neutral parts of the site and the non neutral parts ? And do you try to maintain an overall neutrality within editorials ? Or do you limit the topics concerned by editorials ?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

anthere

____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs