On Apr 17, 2008, at 6:56 AM, wikinews-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
wrote:
Yeah but we need to step away from being identified
with Wikipedia,
because we are not them. We need our own punch line and really should
not have to mention Wikipedia to make us sound better, although I
do see
what you mean. I think a list or RSS of a sort would work
perfectly. We
just need subscribers.
Jason
I am very late to this discussion, which I assume has been going on
for a while in other forms and other places, but I think it is a big
mistake for Wikinews to try to distance itself from Wikipedia. I
guess I understand the resentment or whatever it is that Wikipedia is
this kind of black hole that sucks in all media attention and
conversation..... but that's a good thing isn't it? It seems that
some in Wikinews want to be more like CNN than Wikipedia. Why? It
seems to me wikinews could play a profound role in the participatory
journalism landscape if it worked with Wikipedia rather than trying
to separate itself from it. To that end the suggestions about
supplying original reporting to enhance Wikipedia content would be
critical. Imagine if you could routinely access the audio of an
interview with the subject of an article from their Wikipedia
article. This, as has also been mentioned, would go a long way to
ameliorate one of Wikipedia's thorniest problems - biographies of
living persons. That's one example. Supplying multimedia content,
observation and comment from events also seems vital. "Journalist"
has become a dicey word. Having been one myself for about 10 years
and now teaching in a journalism school I see daily how it's being
redefined. Lots of baggage comes with being a "journalist." It seems
to me "content suppliers" as lame as that sounds is a better way to
approach something like Wikinews.
J. Michael Lyons
user lyonspen