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