Jimmy Wales wrote:
"Open English" is not a language, and so this is not the appropriate forum to propose or promote such a concept. Even so, the concerns raised should of course be considered and dealt with if possible.
...
Wikinews should be open and welcoming to any contributor
Wikinews should not have special complications which are
offputting to newcomers
- We should work hard to balance two goals which are both
important, but which have significant tensions between them: a. Empowering people to do local news b. Keeping the site relevant and interesting for all people
- If a newcomer comes to Wikinews and makes a mistake (i.e. no
proper {{develop}} or {{publish}} tag), then their work should not be lost or hidden, but should instead be highlighted somewhere useful so that other users can help the newcomer learn.
- This one is perhaps the hardest to write in an NPOV manner: Erik
is not the dictator of Wikinews, and furthermore, everyone can acknowledge that he has said so himself, repeatedly. We can all further acknowledge, even Erik, that he acts boldly and with conviction at times and that this has at times irritated people who felt (fairly or unfairly) that he was trying to be a dictator.
...
If everyone agrees, at least roughly, with all the above principles, then what's the point of Open English?
1. Wikinews currently has personal attacks by an admin posted on the Watercooler: no one has said anything about this. When a previous user engaged in such behaviour (User:Paulrevere2005) with the same target (myself) there was considerable pressure put on that user to remove their comments - which the user did.
2. The current new article inputbox uses a nested template to "initialize" new articles. This is a very useful concept, but it will certainly appear confusing to newcomers to Wikinews, or anyone who has never worked with Mediawiki syntax. Articles which do not include the "required" elements are not visible anywhere on the site, but only via the Special:Newpages. Further, the new system is suffering from "instruction creep", despite efforts to keep it simple.
See: http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Template:New_page&action=histor... http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Template:New_article_intro&acti...
3. Wikinews can balance 3a and 3b, and has done an admirable job of doing so. However, it is important for editors to avoid focusing attention on doing "hard news"; Wikinews cannot (and should not try to) compete with main stream news media, and should play to its strengths of many people rather than big stories.
4. It is now possible to list all articles in the main namespace which are not published articles. There are more than 2600 of them, and a clean up will be required.
See: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:IlyaHaykinson/SpecialDPLTest http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Water_cooler#A_technical_solution_for_t...
5. It is my personal opinion not that Erik is acting like a dictator, but that he regularly acts without consulting the community and in opposition to the community norms, and in the process is a catalyst for conflict. When he is called on this behaviour he is abusive, defensive, and does not engage in constructive discussions. For someone who admits he rarely is involved in the project it seems a rather less-than appropriate pattern of behaviour, and one I am personally not willing to accept.
In short, the justification for the Open English edition is primarily that en.Wikinews is not open and supporting of people who are new to wiki and to Wikinews, and has put significant hurdles to publishing their articles in place. Because Wikinews has potential as an entry-point to both Wikimedia Foundation projects and Wikinews in specific, especially in collaboration with school systems as an element of curricula, a more open edition - perhaps analogous to "community newspapers" - should be available.
Amgine