If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way we create most of our articles ...Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-charging-websites
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line "The free news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wikinewssvt@optonline.net wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way we create most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying for it.
-bawolff
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis wiki@konsoletek.com wrote:
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line "The free news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wikinewssvt@optonline.net wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way we create most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@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.
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
We'll pay what something is worth, to us. Murdock controls the Wall Street Journal and The Times, of London. They are both pretty good. I paid $20 a year for full access to The New York Times. That is what I can imagine paying for a high quality on-line publication. This is not a solution for the average paper in trouble, such as The Rocky Mountain Journal. They may not be worth much to anyone.
Fred Bauder
Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying for it.
-bawolff
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis wiki@konsoletek.com wrote:
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line "The free news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wikinewssvt@optonline.net wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way we create most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@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.
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Ragesoss, who has written Wikinews OR, has some thoughts about Wikinews on his blog.There is also a live thread about Wikinews on foundation-l.--SVTCobra----- Original Message -----From: Fred Bauder Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009 5:24 pmSubject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websitesTo: Wikinews mailing list > We'll pay what something is worth, to us. Murdock controls the Wall> Street Journal and The Times, of London. They are both pretty > good. I> paid $20 a year for full access to The New York Times. That is > what I can> imagine paying for a high quality on-line publication. This is > not a> solution for the average paper in trouble, such as The Rocky Mountain> Journal. They may not be worth much to anyone.> > Fred Bauder> > > Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying > for it.> >> > -bawolff> >> >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis > wrote:> >> Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line > "The free> >> news> >> source you can write!"> >>> >> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wrote:> >>>> >>> If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way > we create> >>> most> >>> of our articles ...> >>>> >>> Guardian article:> >>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-%3E charging-websites> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________> >>> Wikinews-l mailing list> >>> Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l%3E >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> --> >> Jon> >> [[User:ShakataGaNai]]> >> http://snowulf.com/ - Blog> >> http://snowulf.imagekind.com/ - Pictures> >> This has been a test of the emergency sig system.> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________> >> Wikinews-l mailing list> >> Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l%3E >>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________> > Wikinews-l mailing list> > Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l%3E >> > > > _______________________________________________> Wikinews-l mailing list> Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l%3E
Here's a link to the first message in the thread for those not subscribed to foundation-l http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-May/051762.html -- -bawolff
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 4:17 PM, wikinewssvt@optonline.net wrote:
Ragesoss, who has written Wikinews OR, has some thoughts about Wikinews on his blog.
There is also a live thread about Wikinews on foundation-l.
--SVTCobra
----- Original Message ----- From: Fred Bauder Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009 5:24 pm Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites To: Wikinews mailing list
We'll pay what something is worth, to us. Murdock controls the Wall Street Journal and The Times, of London. They are both pretty good. I paid $20 a year for full access to The New York Times. That is what I can imagine paying for a high quality on-line publication. This is not a solution for the average paper in trouble, such as The Rocky Mountain Journal. They may not be worth much to anyone.
Fred Bauder
Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying
for it.
-bawolff
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis
wrote:
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line
"The free
news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way
we create
most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-
charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@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.
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
A relatively interesting discussion - but I don't see any clear points we can take action from.
-----Original Message----- From: wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of bawolff Sent: 12 May 2009 01:12 To: Wikinews mailing list Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites
Here's a link to the first message in the thread for those not subscribed to foundation-l http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-May/051762.html -- -bawolff
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 4:17 PM, wikinewssvt@optonline.net wrote:
Ragesoss, who has written Wikinews OR, has some thoughts about Wikinews on his blog.
There is also a live thread about Wikinews on foundation-l.
--SVTCobra
----- Original Message ----- From: Fred Bauder Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009 5:24 pm Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites To: Wikinews mailing list
We'll pay what something is worth, to us. Murdock controls the Wall Street Journal and The Times, of London. They are both pretty good. I paid $20 a year for full access to The New York Times. That is what I can imagine paying for a high quality on-line publication. This is not a solution for the average paper in trouble, such as The Rocky Mountain Journal. They may not be worth much to anyone.
Fred Bauder
Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying
for it.
-bawolff
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis
wrote:
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line
"The free
news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way
we create
most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-
charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@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.
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
_______________________________________________ Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
What can Wikinews take from this and work on?
A repeated concern is that we're always 'behind the times' when we do synthesis reports. There's a degree of truth to that, but taking material from multiple mainstream reports should make our coverage more comprehensive, if albeit a little later.
Second, is how can we work with others? Blogs, Indymedia, and so on all generally have a bias and/or axe to grind. This runs counter to NPOV.
Third, original reporting. Considering the size of the contributor base I think we do pretty well on this. Are there ways we can attract more people to do investigative work? Should we be organising things to have an online 'Wikinews Rolodex' for accredited reporters?
Can't think of anything else from this or the discussion on foundation-l - was surprised that was so reasonable and not "damn Wikinews! We can do news in Wikipedia!".
Brian.
-----Original Message----- From: wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of wikinewssvt@optonline.net Sent: 11 May 2009 23:18 To: Wikinews mailing list Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites
Ragesoss http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Ragesoss , who has written Wikinews OR, has some thoughts about Wikinews on his http://ragesossscholar.blogspot.com/2009/05/rethinking-wikinews.html blog.
There is also a live thread about Wikinews on foundation-l.
-- http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:SVTCobra SVTCobra
----- Original Message ----- From: Fred Bauder Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009 5:24 pm Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites To: Wikinews mailing list
We'll pay what something is worth, to us. Murdock controls the Wall Street Journal and The Times, of London. They are both pretty good. I paid $20 a year for full access to The New York Times. That is what I can imagine paying for a high quality on-line publication. This is not a solution for the average paper in trouble, such as The Rocky Mountain Journal. They may not be worth much to anyone.
Fred Bauder
Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying
for it.
-bawolff
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis
wrote:
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line
"The free
news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way
we create
most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-
charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@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.
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
I've been thinking about that thread, and well it doesn't really have a lot of practical advice at first glance, here's some thoughts I came up with (these thoughts may be rough arround the edges/unsuitable, this is just off the top of my head)
*Synthesis vs OR - should we be doing more to highlight our original reporting. Currently we highlight OR by a list on the sidebar of the main page, and a little box on the article. Should we do more? In the early days of wikinews, We at one point wrote '''Original Reporting''' in italics beside any OR article name in the big list of articles on the Main Page. perhaps we should revisit that idea. (cf example: [[Wikinews:2005/June/18]])
*Someone on the foundation-l thread was comparing a news website to a newspaper, and talked about one of the main benifits of a news paper is you can see lots of different articles all at once. Perhaps one radical main page design would be instead of a list of articles + a couple leads, the entire main page is leads that change on each page load to different articles or something.
thoughts?
-bawolff
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
What can Wikinews take from this and work on?
A repeated concern is that we’re always ‘behind the times’ when we do synthesis reports. There’s a degree of truth to that, but taking material from multiple mainstream reports should make our coverage more comprehensive, if albeit a little later.
Second, is how can we work with others? Blogs, Indymedia, and so on all generally have a bias and/or axe to grind. This runs counter to NPOV.
Third, original reporting. Considering the size of the contributor base I think we do pretty well on this. Are there ways we can attract more people to do investigative work? Should we be organising things to have an online ‘Wikinews Rolodex’ for accredited reporters?
Can’t think of anything else from this or the discussion on foundation-l – was surprised that was so reasonable and not “damn Wikinews! We can do news in Wikipedia!”.
Brian.
-----Original Message----- From: wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of wikinewssvt@optonline.net Sent: 11 May 2009 23:18 To: Wikinews mailing list Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites
Ragesoss, who has written Wikinews OR, has some thoughts about Wikinews on his blog.
There is also a live thread about Wikinews on foundation-l.
--SVTCobra
----- Original Message ----- From: Fred Bauder Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009 5:24 pm Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites To: Wikinews mailing list
We'll pay what something is worth, to us. Murdock controls the Wall Street Journal and The Times, of London. They are both pretty good. I paid $20 a year for full access to The New York Times. That is what I can imagine paying for a high quality on-line publication. This is not a solution for the average paper in trouble, such as The Rocky Mountain Journal. They may not be worth much to anyone.
Fred Bauder
Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying
for it.
-bawolff
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis
wrote:
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line
"The free
news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way
we create
most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-
charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@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.
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Also, I was reading the results of the usability survey for wikipedia, and i think lots of the problems discussed there with the help information being too much information all at once without getting the important information across, rings true here as well.
-bawolff
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:55 PM, bawolff bawolff+wn@gmail.com wrote:
I've been thinking about that thread, and well it doesn't really have a lot of practical advice at first glance, here's some thoughts I came up with (these thoughts may be rough arround the edges/unsuitable, this is just off the top of my head)
*Synthesis vs OR - should we be doing more to highlight our original reporting. Currently we highlight OR by a list on the sidebar of the main page, and a little box on the article. Should we do more? In the early days of wikinews, We at one point wrote '''Original Reporting''' in italics beside any OR article name in the big list of articles on the Main Page. perhaps we should revisit that idea. (cf example: [[Wikinews:2005/June/18]])
*Someone on the foundation-l thread was comparing a news website to a newspaper, and talked about one of the main benifits of a news paper is you can see lots of different articles all at once. Perhaps one radical main page design would be instead of a list of articles + a couple leads, the entire main page is leads that change on each page load to different articles or something.
thoughts?
-bawolff
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Brian McNeil brian.mcneil@wikinewsie.org wrote:
What can Wikinews take from this and work on?
A repeated concern is that we’re always ‘behind the times’ when we do synthesis reports. There’s a degree of truth to that, but taking material from multiple mainstream reports should make our coverage more comprehensive, if albeit a little later.
Second, is how can we work with others? Blogs, Indymedia, and so on all generally have a bias and/or axe to grind. This runs counter to NPOV.
Third, original reporting. Considering the size of the contributor base I think we do pretty well on this. Are there ways we can attract more people to do investigative work? Should we be organising things to have an online ‘Wikinews Rolodex’ for accredited reporters?
Can’t think of anything else from this or the discussion on foundation-l – was surprised that was so reasonable and not “damn Wikinews! We can do news in Wikipedia!”.
Brian.
-----Original Message----- From: wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of wikinewssvt@optonline.net Sent: 11 May 2009 23:18 To: Wikinews mailing list Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites
Ragesoss, who has written Wikinews OR, has some thoughts about Wikinews on his blog.
There is also a live thread about Wikinews on foundation-l.
--SVTCobra
----- Original Message ----- From: Fred Bauder Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009 5:24 pm Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] News Corp to charge for newspaper websites To: Wikinews mailing list
We'll pay what something is worth, to us. Murdock controls the Wall Street Journal and The Times, of London. They are both pretty good. I paid $20 a year for full access to The New York Times. That is what I can imagine paying for a high quality on-line publication. This is not a solution for the average paper in trouble, such as The Rocky Mountain Journal. They may not be worth much to anyone.
Fred Bauder
Good luck to them - somehow i can't imagine most people paying
for it.
-bawolff
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jon Davis
wrote:
Well it would bring new meaning to 'free' in our tag line
"The free
news source you can write!"
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 16:53, wrote:
If this idea spreads it could fundamentally change the way
we create
most of our articles ...
Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/07/rupert-murdoch-
charging-websites
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@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.
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org