[WikiEN-l] BBC blog on WSJ study

[Bod Notbod]

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 5:19 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> "So, in essence, many Wikipedia articles are another way that the work
> of news publications is quickly condensed and reused without
> compensation."
>
> This is more than a little rich considering Wikipedia is the
> number-one universal backgrounder for working journalists.

I do think it's a valid complaint.

I feel that Wikinews might be pushing things; it is still essentially
a distillation of other people's work.

And the *most* newsworthy stuff makes it into Wikipedia. As a reader
of Wikipedia I think it's absolutely great. As an editor I'm
astonished at what fellow editors accomplish with topics. But if I put
myself in the shoes of journalists and newspaper owners I would be
thinking there's something unfair going on.