No subject

influence in the populations where Internet is a dominant source of
informations. This means that some facts presented on Wikinews may
lead to the victory/defeat of some political option... Or to much
higher/lower market share of some multinational company. And those
fields are dangerous and may lead to:

1) closure of Wikinews (and other projects?) or
2) making of Wikinews (and other projects?) a battlefield of different
*real* interest groups (implicitly or explicitly) or
3) "pacifying" community and driving it into the stagnation and decline or
4) Wikimedian community as dominant global political force.

If not 1, the most possible is merging of the rest three.

I don't want to say what is the good option and what is not (maybe all
of them are good, maybe all of them are bad). The only fact is that it
will be a real nightmare if we wouldn't be prepared.

> BTW, I wasn't trying to be deliberately dense with my last message. I
> honestly didn't know whether you meant educating the community members about
> the specific content of an article, or the more technical elements of
> editing itself. Personally, I would also like to see a project to educate
> the members about how better to communicate with each other. This is proving
> to be quite a hard sell.

I used the term in very wide range: from the particular subject, via
technical knowledge to communication and personal relations. Wikipedia
and other Wikimedian should become the school (actually, the whole
educational system) of the new age. If we don't take this position,
after 20 years Wikipedia will be studied as one of nice, good, but
past projects.