I'd have to agree with Bawolff's general sentiment. I don't really see much
use for a "Meta Wikinews". We're not going to be actively sharing
templates, because everyone needs their own translations anyways. We've got
very few bots going on WN, and very little new bot work. As for moving
accreditation, I'm sorry but I don't think that makes sense - why would I
vote for a reporter from ja.wn - I've never read their articles and I don't
know anything about their work.
Like every other WMF project, each Wikinews does things its own way. The
formats might be fairly similar for articles (simply because we copy each
other), but in the end each group is very different in the way their
articles get put out. We all know how locked down the process is at en.wn.
I'm not to rain on your parade, so I'm sorry If I sound a harsh.
-Jon
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 17:14, bawolff
<bawolff+wn@gmail.com<bawolff%2Bwn@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Honestly, anything that has ever been started on meta for wikinews,
> has tended to fade into oblivian (for example WORTNET) I think a large
> part of that is since its not in local RC, no one sees it. I don't
> think a wikinews specific meta is going to change that.
> --
> -bawolff
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Milos Rancic<millosh(a)gmail.com
wrote:
> > I think that we need such place
for a couple of reasons:
> > * Meta is "too Meta" for our needs. We need a meta site which would
be
> > regulated by Wikinewsians.
> > * All coordination will be moved to that site: this includes, but it
> > is not limited to:
> > ** Organizing bot work.
> > ** Organizing work related to cooperation: translations, contacts and
> similar.
> > ** Accreditation process should be moved there.
> > * In the future, we should make Template: namespace at that site which
> > would be used by all Wikinews editions.
> > * We may generate there a set of documents which would help to the new
> > editions how to start a successful edition. BTW, as a LangCom member,
> > a number of times I mentioned that not just localization of the
> > messages should be enough for the project approval. Wikinews edition
> > is the most problematic for approval because it needs constant work.
> > So, as a LangCom member, I would like to see defined rules by
> > Wikinewsians for new edition approval.
> > * Similarly to
beta.wikiversity.org, Wikinews meta site may be used
> > instead of Incubator: It would be much better if the process of
> > creation of Wikinews edition would be monitored by Wikinewsians, not
> > by contributors with just Wikipedian background. (While it is good
> > enough formally to have contributors with just Wikipedian background
> > for all other projects, Wikinews has very different needs than one
> > repository of knowledge.)
> > * Optionally, we may use something like
wiki.wikinewsie.org for that
> > purpose; but it has a number of limits.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikinews-l mailing list
> > Wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikinews-l mailing list
> Wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
>
--
Jon
[[User:ShakataGaNai]]
http://snowulf.com/ - Blog
http://snowulf.imagekind.com/ - Pictures
This has been a test of the emergency sig system.