[Foundation-l] The systematic and codified bias against non-Western articles on Wikinews

[Yaroslav M. Blanter]

>> While I agree this isn't a good situation to be in, I'm not sure what

> Wikipedia does review In The News submissions before they go on the
> homepage.
> 
> Wikinews articles get syndicated out to Google News and posted on
> Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites. There's something of a
> responsibility to make sure they are good before doing so.
> 
> That said, there are ways to fix the problems: mainly by having a more
> lightweight review process before publication. Have it so that the
> story only has to be newsworthy and not have blatant sourcing/copyvio
> problems, then modify the story after publication as new facts come
> out for the next day or so.
> 
> Basically, this is how sites like BBC News operate: they'll often get
> the story out within five minutes of getting it off the wire, then
> rewrite it as they get more information. We may prefer to have a
> slightly slower approach for sourcing reasons, but ideally it'd be
> closer to half an hour than 72 hours.
> 
> English Wikinews' problems can be fixed with more reviewers. To get
> more reviewers, we need more editors. To get more editors, we actually
> have to publish their stories relatively quickly so they don't get
> disenchanted and frustrated with the whole process. And to do that, we
> need more reviewers. Chicken and egg problem...

Can not you just introduce a flag of a "trusted editor", similar to an
autoreviewer? I mean, if the news creator is a en.wp administrator most
probably he/she is not a vandal trying to post junk in the Google News. Why
this message should have been reviewed at all?

Cheers
Yaroslav