See Steve's reply, below, which didn't make it to this list. I agree with the promotion point - this isn't the place to push unrelated events, although it's always good to mention them if they are related (e.g. as in the 5 million Commons files release). Andrew did make a number of other points as well as this one, though.
Thanks, Mike
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Steve Virgin" steve@mediafocusuk.com Date: 29 December 2009 16:57:27 GMT To: charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com Cc: Wikimedia UK Board mailing list board@wikimedia.org.uk Subject: Re: [WMUK Board] [Wikimediauk-l] Press release (Public Domain Day) Reply-To: Wikimedia UK Board mailing list board@wikimedia.org.uk
Charles is quite right that we have been in touch
He was aware that we needed to run this through the Board Meeting tonight as I pointed this out last week
I think he was aware I might have some reservations (albeit minor) about the text so I doubt anyone thought it would be issued prematurely
Any promotion of Britain Loves Wikipedia should be in a section at the bottom called 'Editor's Notes' that comes at the end of the press release - it should not come in the main body text as this will mean more than one single message is being conveyed and this will be confusing
I'd certainly promote it in the Editor's Notes - but nowhere else. Or, simply write a new press release all about Britain Loves Wikipedia and issue that to secure the same
I had a few minor and small doubts about the 70 year rule so on phrases in the text suggesting 'copyright free on anything' which I simply modified to sound less harsh. But our collective Board knowledge on the copyright matter would no doubt be of interest
Hope this helps
Best Steve
From: "Charles Matthews" charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 4:36 PM To: "Michael Peel" email@mikepeel.net Cc: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org; "Steve Virgin" steve@mediafocusuk.com Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Press release (Public Domain Day)
Michael Peel wrote:
In terms of the content of the press release, there still seem to be some outstanding questions. Andrew posted on the talk page 5 days ago, pointing out a few things, which it would be good to discuss. The central point is: are we absolutely positive that the facts are completely accurate? Also, note that the press release as it stands is lacking a headline and a date.
I don't agree with the Talk page comment "release should promote WMUK and its activities, e.g. Britain Loves Wikipedia, as much as possible". My views on press releases are probably known to readers of the list by now. I would go so far as to say that "corporate identity" material is dead weight in getting media attention. To put it another way, promotion through simply contacting the media has to earn its keep.
On the issue of handling, I have been in contact with a Board member, and I imagine my views will be represented to the Board. I'll pass on second-guessing the detailed drafting. 70 years is correct for the UK, that much is clear, and _in the press release_ nothing else should be brought in.
Charles
Board mailing list Board@wikimedia.org.uk http://wikimedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/board_wikimedia.org.uk
In the end, a story appeared today:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6916596/WB-Yeats-and-Sigmund...
Well done indeed to Mike and Andrew in particular for pushing on past all the obstacles.
Charles
"To illustrate the potential, Wikimedia has organised for a range of its celebrity backers to record their favourite Yeats poems, which will be posted online over the next few days. "
Since when?
Seddon
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 20:27:30 +0000 From: charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimediauk-l] Telegraph runs story ...
In the end, a story appeared today:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6916596/WB-Yeats-and-Sigmund...
Well done indeed to Mike and Andrew in particular for pushing on past all the obstacles.
Charles
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_________________________________________________________________ Got more than one Hotmail account? Save time by linking them together http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394591/direct/01/
2010/1/2 joseph seddon life_is_bitter_sweet@hotmail.co.uk:
"To illustrate the potential, Wikimedia has organised for a range of its celebrity backers to record their favourite Yeats poems, which will be posted online over the next few days. "
Since when?
I remember seeing it proposed, but it being organised is news to me...
joseph seddon wrote:
"To illustrate the potential, Wikimedia has organised for a range of its celebrity backers to record their favourite Yeats poems, which will be posted online over the next few days. "
Since when?
Important not to believe everything in the papers, isn't it?
Charles
On Sat, 2010-01-02 at 20:32 +0000, Charles Matthews wrote:
joseph seddon wrote:
"To illustrate the potential, Wikimedia has organised for a range of its celebrity backers to record their favourite Yeats poems, which will be posted online over the next few days. "
Since when?
Important not to believe everything in the papers, isn't it?
Charles
I contacted Stephen Fry's agent but got no response. It may have been bad timing given the holidays, perhaps someone else could try and see if that can be arranged after the fact.
2010/1/2 Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org:
I contacted Stephen Fry's agent but got no response. It may have been bad timing given the holidays, perhaps someone else could try and see if that can be arranged after the fact.
I contacted his agent once to see if he would be interested in getting involved with our bid for Wikimania 2010 and also got no response. If he hadn't just announced that he's going incommunicado until April to work on his autobiography, I would have suggested contacting him via Twitter. He won't do any recordings until he's finished the book, though.
I don't think that contacting him via Twitter would be the most effective way - you can imagine how many DM and @ he gets per minute at over 1 million followers ;) How was the agent contacted, E-Mail? I often find the the traditional telephone call can often work wonders.
Ian [[User:Poeloq]]
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.comwrote:
2010/1/2 Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org:
I contacted Stephen Fry's agent but got no response. It may have been bad timing given the holidays, perhaps someone else could try and see if that can be arranged after the fact.
I contacted his agent once to see if he would be interested in getting involved with our bid for Wikimania 2010 and also got no response. If he hadn't just announced that he's going incommunicado until April to work on his autobiography, I would have suggested contacting him via Twitter. He won't do any recordings until he's finished the book, though.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
2010/1/2 Ian A. Holton poeloq@gmail.com:
I don't think that contacting him via Twitter would be the most effective way - you can imagine how many DM and @ he gets per minute at over 1 million followers ;) How was the agent contacted, E-Mail? I often find the the traditional telephone call can often work wonders.
He frequently replies to people that talk to him on twitter. When I contacted his agent it was by email, a telephone call might work but there is no guarantee you'll get to talk to anyone other than his agent's secretary.
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
If he hadn't just announced that he's going incommunicado until April to work on his autobiography, I would have suggested contacting him via Twitter. He won't do any recordings until he's finished the book, though.
Damn, must read to the end of threads before posting.
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
I contacted Stephen Fry's agent but got no response. It may have been bad timing given the holidays, perhaps someone else could try and see if that can be arranged after the fact.
Stephen Fry posted on his blog yesterday that he has a book due for completion in April and as such as disappearing from Twitter and keeping his appointments clear. So I fear he'll not be up for this until at least the middle of the year.
2010/1/2 Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com:
In the end, a story appeared today:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6916596/WB-Yeats-and-Sigmund...
Well done indeed to Mike and Andrew in particular for pushing on past all the obstacles.
I like the addition at the end of last year / next year. Something to include for next year's one, I think - having an "In the past few years..." line gives the opportunity to cram in some extra names the journalist may recognise.
On 2 Jan 2010, at 20:27, Charles Matthews wrote:
In the end, a story appeared today:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6916596/WB-Yeats- and-Sigmund-Freud-works-posted-on-Wikipedia-as-copyright-expires.html
Well done indeed to Mike and Andrew in particular for pushing on past all the obstacles.
Well done Charles and Brian for writing the article, and also pushing past your share of obstacles. :-)
I think I've found another addiction thanks to this - I spent most of today and yesterday making a book of Yeats available on Wikisource... If you haven't already tried proofreading a book on Wikisource, then I would thoroughly recommend it.
The next press release, due to go out tomorrow evening, will be about a donation of images from the Mary Rose Trust:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Press_releases/Mary_Rose_Trust_donation
Please help! If this goes down well in the media, then it will be a great precedent for getting more organizations to make their content available by Wikimedia websites.
Thanks, Mike
On Sat, 2010-01-02 at 23:24 +0000, Michael Peel wrote:
The next press release, due to go out tomorrow evening, will be about a donation of images from the Mary Rose Trust:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Press_releases/Mary_Rose_Trust_donation
Please help! If this goes down well in the media, then it will be a great precedent for getting more organizations to make their content available by Wikimedia websites.
You mention the Tropenmuseum; there's more than just the image donation there. They're providing high-resolution images and Wikimedia volunteers are carrying out the costly, time-intensive process of digitally restoring them.
The Mary Rose pics won't need restored, but Commons offers some interesting "services" to museums.
On 3 Jan 2010, at 00:35, Brian McNeil wrote:
On Sat, 2010-01-02 at 23:24 +0000, Michael Peel wrote:
The next press release, due to go out tomorrow evening, will be about a donation of images from the Mary Rose Trust:
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Press_releases/Mary_Rose_Trust_donation
Please help! If this goes down well in the media, then it will be a great precedent for getting more organizations to make their content available by Wikimedia websites.
You mention the Tropenmuseum; there's more than just the image donation there. They're providing high-resolution images and Wikimedia volunteers are carrying out the costly, time-intensive process of digitally restoring them.
The Mary Rose pics won't need restored, but Commons offers some interesting "services" to museums.
Durova's already done what she can with the image in the release at the moment. If you can figure out how to best add a mention of digital restorations, please do...
Mike
On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 00:40 +0000, Michael Peel wrote:
On 3 Jan 2010, at 00:35, Brian McNeil wrote:
Durova's already done what she can with the image in the release at the moment. If you can figure out how to best add a mention of digital restorations, please do...
I'd like to work that in, the closest to an appropriate place I see is the "about Commons" section, and I'm stumped for a wording.
I had a few edit conflicts making some changes; mostly taken from the English Wikinews' style guide. The repeat one was "spell out all numbers of twenty or less". I also figured the standard date format should be 'daynumber monthname year' - a UK-style/standard. There were a couple of American spellings in there too, mostly on "soft" words that a spell checker will accept either of.
I don't think WMUK needs a style guide as long as Wikinews' but, it might be an idea to note points as we go along that should be consistent.
Brian McNeil wrote:
I don't think WMUK needs a style guide as long as Wikinews' but, it might be an idea to note points as we go along that should be consistent.
Oooh, let's do the endash-hyphen thing right here ... not. The press do have their own style guides, so the message is more important than the medium.
I have moved material around to get the punch into the first para. "Mary Rose" is good: on everyone's radar, apparently.
Charles
On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 09:51 +0000, Charles Matthews wrote:
Brian McNeil wrote:
I don't think WMUK needs a style guide as long as Wikinews' but, it might be an idea to note points as we go along that should be consistent.
Oooh, let's do the endash-hyphen thing right here ... not. The press do have their own style guides, so the message is more important than the medium.
I was not suggest importing ultra-anal-retentive nitpicking from English Wikipedia. Particularly something as stupid as the ndash one which is a visual issue and for a press release they would look the same 'on the wire'.
The rules I saw as important to apply in the press release were:
* British English spelling (including preferring 'organisation' over 'organization') * Consisted, UK-style date formatting with the month spelt out to be unambiguous. * Spell out all numbers of twenty or less
The rest is just preference for active voice where possible and good grammar.
I have moved material around to get the punch into the first para. "Mary Rose" is good: on everyone's radar, apparently.
Are press releases going onto any of the semi-junk freebie pseudo-wires? There's several of these turn up in Google News results.
How are the current recipients of issued press releases managed? Is there a distribution list? How would, say, a blogger go about subscribing to WMUK news?
Brian McNeil wrote:
The rules I saw as important to apply in the press release were:
- British English spelling (including preferring 'organisation' over
'organization')
- Consisted, UK-style date formatting with the month spelt out to be
unambiguous.
- Spell out all numbers of twenty or less
The rest is just preference for active voice where possible and good grammar.
Why not post these to the wiki, as [[Recommendations for press release style]] or something?
Charles
On 3 Jan 2010, at 10:44, Brian McNeil wrote:
I have moved material around to get the punch into the first para. "Mary Rose" is good: on everyone's radar, apparently.
Are press releases going onto any of the semi-junk freebie pseudo- wires? There's several of these turn up in Google News results.
How are the current recipients of issued press releases managed? Is there a distribution list? How would, say, a blogger go about subscribing to WMUK news?
At the moment, we just email the press releases to those that we've been in contact with (i.e. they've previously gotten in touch with us to talk to us about a Wikipedia story). We don't have a wider distribution list yet, aside from the blog.
Is it worth moving to having a press-releases mailing list that people can subscribe to, in addition to sending them out to appropriate specific journalists?
If anyone has any suggestions of contacts/organizations to send press releases to, please let me know offlist.
Thanks, Mike
2010/1/3 Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org:
How are the current recipients of issued press releases managed? Is there a distribution list? How would, say, a blogger go about subscribing to WMUK news?
I would expect all press releases would go on the WMUK blog.
- d.
Charles Matthews wrote:
Brian McNeil wrote:
I don't think WMUK needs a style guide as long as Wikinews' but, it might be an idea to note points as we go along that should be consistent.
Oooh, let's do the endash-hyphen thing right here ... not. The press do have their own style guides, so the message is more important than the medium.
I have moved material around to get the punch into the first para. "Mary Rose" is good: on everyone's radar, apparently.
Charles
Style guides? A few weeks back, I contacted The Guardian to correct the spelling of "PARC" quoting a well known online encyclopedia as a reliable source. I also pointed out that "parc" appeared to be a registered trademark.
They were adamant. Their style guide said that it should be "Parc".
"One of those who has spent his time studying what happens on Wikipedia is Ed H Chi, a scientist who works at the Palo Alto Research Center (Parc) in California."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/aug/12/wikipedia-deletionist-inclu...
But elsewhere (Technology Guardian) the spelling is correct:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2004/feb/25/formerxeroxpa
Go figure.
Gordo
2010/1/5 Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com:
Style guides? A few weeks back, I contacted The Guardian to correct the spelling of "PARC" quoting a well known online encyclopedia as a reliable source. I also pointed out that "parc" appeared to be a registered trademark.
They were adamant. Their style guide said that it should be "Parc".
The BBC's style guide says the same. Acronyms (that is, abbreviations that are pronounced as a word, rather than as individual letters) get only one capital letter, eg. "Nasa" not "NASA". I guess it makes it easier to know how to pronounce an unfamiliar name.
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org