[Wikipedia-l] Re: [IMC-Tech] Re: Wikinews demo launches!

[Anthere]

With a softer opinion of Indymedia than Jimbo, I would however say that 
I support him here. I do not think we should develop particular strong 
relationship and collaboration with Indymedia.


Indymedia is clearly biaised. It does not matter that many of us 
appreciate Indymedia, or even that some of us participate to it.
What is important is that we are different, and we must stay different, 
not only in concept but in our readers view.


We both occupy the same ecological niche in the news ecosystem, but we 
do not have the same roles. Both roles are important and must be 
preserved separate.
Our role will be to offer neutral news.
Their role is much more to counter balance other biaised news network, 
which will keep on existing (and which MUST keep on existing).
In a diverse world, neutral and biais is important.


However, not only do we want to be neutral, but we want to be **seen** 
neutral by our readers. It is even more important for a wikinews 
project, where news will be published in 4 hours.
I deeply believe neutrality is a goal which can only be approached after 
hundreds of careful contributions by many many editors. Neutrality needs 
time to happen.
In wikinews, articles will be published in less than a day. Most are 
likely to be written by a limited number of editors. This is why, it is 
even MORE critical for wikinews, to appear INDEPENDANT and UNBIAISED.


If we want to be seen neutral by our readers, we must NOT show in any 
way that we are linked or collaborating with a biaised news network. It 
is very very important.

And I say this not implying that I do not like Indymedia. This is just a 
question of principle and of public perception. We should not make 
collaboration with our pet websites, just because many of use approve them.


Anthere


Sorry if I appear harsh.
As many here may be aware, I did not support the creation of wikinews as 
an individual editor. I chose not to oppose though on the board level 
because wikinews was largely supported by the community. However, I 
think there are several risks in the wikinews project, which might hurt 
our global project.

I see official collaboration between Indymedia and Wikinews as one of 
these risks, as it could decrease the public perception of us as a 
neutral source of information.



jeff a écrit:
> Chuck0 wrote:
> 
>>Jama Poulsen wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 07:05:46PM -0800, Jimmy (Jimbo) 
>>
> Wales wrote:
> 
>>>>http://demo.wikinews.org/
>>>
>>>Has anyone been thinking about how Wikinews could cooperate
>>>with the Independent Media Center (IMC) project
>>>(http://www.indymedia.org)?
>>
>>I'm skeptical about this idea. What is the political
>>orientation of Wikinews?
> 
> 
> My guess is that it would have the "Neutral Point of View". I've 
> been impressed at how well wikipedia has been able to maintain 
> this goal on controversial subjects.
> 
> 
>>Indymedia exists as an alternative 
>>media space for the political left (broadly defined). Is
>>Wikinews apolitical, left-leaning, or friendly towards
>>neo-fascists?
> 
> 
> That's a bit harsh. Can you point to a single wikipedia article 
> that has been friendly to neo-fascists?
> 
> Indymedia is "left-leaning" but could certainly be an  
> automated/semi-automated contributor to wikinews even if there 
> are viewpoints on there that are generally not on Indymedia. 
> Wikinews could have both, like news.google. Wikinews is 
> probably more sympathetic to Indymedia than google as well.
> See the wikipedia entry on Indymedia--it's current & good:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indymedia
> 
> Or take a look at their entry on Anarchism (which nicely links 
> to Chuck's infoshop.org):
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism
> 
> 
>>I've been told that Wikipedia is run by right 
>>wing libertarians, so hwo do we know that the volunteer work
>>put into a joint project won't be exploited by venture
>>capitalists when they try to turn Wikipedia into an IPO?
> 
> 
> wikipedia is a non-profit and the articles are under the GFDL. I 
> doubt it will ever go IPO... For more info, see:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Overview_FAQ#Who_owns_Wikipedia.3F
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home
> 
> If it ever does turn commercial, you can download the /entire/ 
> database and set up your own wikipedia and do whatever you want 
> with the articles as long as you comply with the GFDL. See: 
> http://download.wikimedia.org/
> 
> I wish Indymedia database dumps were publicly available!
> 
> 
>>I'm opposed to this partnership until it can be determined
>>how Indymedia would benefit from any partnership with a newly
>>launched project.
> 
> 
> It could benefit by wider distribution of Indymedia content. 
> Wikipedia has a huge audience, and deservedly so. In general, 
> I'm in favor of collaboration between wikinews & indymedia.
> 
> Chuck, stop dissing one of my favorite Internet projects. ;)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -Jeff