[Foundation-l] Seeking clarification

[Dan Rosenthal]

And yet for every good story Wikinews has, it is buried under 100 crap  
stories, conspiracy theories  about the WMF, self-deprecating leaks,  
etc.

Clean up the rampant bias within many Wikinews stories, and maybe  
you'll get there.

For once I agree with GerardM. Wikipedia did breaking stories first.  
It did them best. And it still does.

Wikinews may eventually grow into a truly outstanding organization,  
but it's not there yet. While you say that Wikipedia contributors are  
only thinking about themselves, turn that around on Wikinewsies? You  
aren't the only news site out there. You certainly aren't the only WMF  
project out there, nor are you the biggest. Remember that you are a  
smaller cog in a much larger wheel. The WMF can't be as effective as  
it is if it does not focus on its strengths, which right now are the  
Wikipedias and Commons. Maybe soon Wikinews will be one of the  
strengths too, but it's just not quite there yet IMHO.

-Dan

On Jan 23, 2008, at 4:10 PM, Jason Safoutin wrote:

>
>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:05:07 +0100
>> From: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Seeking clarification
>> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
>> 	<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Message-ID:
>> 	<41a006820801230405r3e39055ft589fa3e99b98d6c0 at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>
>> Hoi,
>> I would turn it around, are the communities of the projects  
>> communicating
>> with the WMF? I would argue that there is a gaggle of people all  
>> talking
>> among each other making such a din that they are not heard over  
>> make so much
>> noise that the WMF is not heard. I would also argue that it is for  
>> the
>> people themselves to organise when and what they need, mindful of  
>> there
>> being a foundation that will have to approve of what they come up  
>> with,
>>
>
> One. At least two board members were regular helpers and  
> contributers to
> Wikinews and to Wikipedia, and probably many other project. Both of
> which do not participate in the community anymore, both who, as  
> elected
> board memberes, have basically ignored the needs and or requests of
> those projects. Erik is the *founder* of Wikinews...but where is he?
> Worried about Kaltura and Wikieducator and Encyclopedia of life.
>
>> Wikipedia predates Wikinews. Wikipedia did news before Wiknews  
>> existed. Much
>> of the relevance of Wikipedia is in their bringing background  
>> information to
>> the news. If Wikinews cannot handle this, tough. If it means that  
>> Wikinews
>> is a project that is a failure, tough. In the end it is a failure  
>> for the
>> people who promoted the idea of Wikinews, however I think there is  
>> plenty of
>> scope for Wikinews to hack it. But the Wikinewsies have to find  
>> their own
>> way, their own niche. So please move on.
>>
>
> Again. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Wikinews is news. Wikipedia is  
> not
> the only WMF project and its them that needs to realize that, along  
> with
> the board/WMF, which they currently don't. It's not a matter of  
> handling
> it, its a matter of competition, which is NOT the goal of the WMF or
> their projects. If anything, Wikinews should be granted a majority of
> their news section...after all Wikipedia gets their own links  
> throughout
> WMF projects.
>
> Wikinews is far from a failure. It IMHO is one of the most successful
> Citizen Journalism site on the web. We have more OR Exclusive stories
> than any CJ site and we also interviewed a head of state...something  
> NO
> other CJ site has come remotely close to doing. Not to mention the
> handful of BIG stories WN broke. So to even incline that WN is a  
> failure
> is just 100% wrong.
>
> Hard to move on, when the scope of WMF's *current* view is what's best
> for only WP, WP, WP....I think it's time they move on, and remember  
> they
> have other projects.
>
>
>> Again, it is YOU that has to make things work. At best the WMF  
>> provides you
>> with a framework. It is you, the editor, the community that have to  
>> make
>> things work. The WMF provides the hammer a nail, it is you that has  
>> to hit
>> the nail on the head.
>>
>
> Then maybe the board and such should not get in the habit of making
> policies or resolutions for projects, especially when that item does  
> not
> conform to the needs and goals of a project. Like the image resolution
> for example. I think WN and other smaller projects have hit the nail  
> on
> the head, and have driven it into the wood...I just think those  
> projects
> are being neglected by their parents.
>
>> In conclusion, I could not disagree with you more.
>> Thanks,
>>      GerardM
>>
>
> Sometimes we have to agree to disagree.
>
> Jason Safoutin (DragonFire1024)
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l