[Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
52 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Jennifer Pryor-Summers
Dan

I've not seen any proposals involving shutting down projects without
> community involvement, so hopefully you shouldn't need to worry about this.
>

The problem with failing projects like Wikinews and Wikiversity is that
there is not a critical mass in their community.  I wouldn't go so far as
to say there is no community, but for all practical purposes that might as
well be true.  In such cases there isn't a realistic prospect of community
involvement and the WMF needs to decide how to manage that situation on on
of their projects.  A small investment to set up a user group to own the
new project under a new brand, move the content off the WMF servers,
removing the Wikim/pedia branding on the way, and maybe pay a few years
hosting charges as a sign of goodwill seems the right way to go.

JPS
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Jennifer Pryor-Summers
Our brand is already on it in these cases, and yes it would be sending a message - "We want you to risk your time and effort on our projects but we may later decide to discard everything you worked for"
Cheers,
P

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jennifer Pryor-Summers
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 8:19 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Peter

Putting your brand on a project that is visibly failing also sends out a
message, to the world at large.  Is that a message you want to broadcast?

JPS

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 3:32 PM Peter Southwood <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Abandoning a project and shutting it down sends a message to all
> volunteers that their work could be similarly abandoned and lost one day.
> Is that a message we want to broadcast?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Ziko van Dijk
> Sent: 17 April 2019 00:46
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand
> system for our 2030 goals]
>
> Hello,
> Some years ago, some volunteers have proposed a new Wikimedia wiki. It did
> not turn out as expected. That‘s okay, the movement should try out thing
> from time to time.
> But this wiki should not be seen as an eternal obligation to be kept.
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
> Samuel Klein <[hidden email]> schrieb am Di. 16. Apr. 2019 um 23:56:
>
> > Jennifer -- as you say, there is a contradiction here in the self-image
> and
> > internal narrative of the projects and movement.  A classic branding
> issue
> > ;)
> > * On the one hand, we lack clear, consistent language to talk about
> topical
> > subprojects (what do you call 'the Current Events specialists on the
> major
> > language Wikpiedias'?  some obvious names have already been taken)
> > * On the other, for the few Names that we assign to Projects, we
> > overspecify what they mean ('Wikinews is original news reporting or
> > synthesis, done on a wikinews.org site').
> >
> > We propagate this confusion of identity to those outside the projects
> > trying to understand them; which in turn leads to misunderstanding in the
> > world at large, and fewer potential collaborators joining the projects:
> >      I was recently at a gathering of international fact-checkers.   They
> > all prized Wikipedia as a model for what rapid collective editing can
> > accomplish; assumed wikinews and wikitribune were the best efforts to
> date
> > of applying that to current events; and began an enthusiastic discussion
> > about how to do it better.  When I pointed out that Wikipedias did
> exactly
> > what they were discussing, for the most popular news, this was startling
> > and satisfying to them.  However as there is no central cafe or village
> > pump for current events editors, and what portals do exist are impossible
> > to find for all but the most persistent, it is not obvious how to engage
> > with them...
> >
> > This is a challenge of naming + identity that really holds us back: ways
> > for people to form groups, projects, message streams; and channel,
> > advertise, amplify, polish them; use them for flash projects and
> > coalescence, for awareness and thanks.  We have tried many small steps in
> > this direction but have never made groups or hashtags work as simple,
> > functional tools of alignment.
> >
> > SJ
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > that
> > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a
> > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> Wikipedia
> > is
> > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to
> me.
> > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward
> is
> > to
> > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > >
> > > JPS
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> Wikipedia
> > > > seems
> > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with
> > its
> > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> > should
> > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jennifer,
> > > >
> > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the
> vast
> > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
> Wikinews
> > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > properties.
> > > >
> > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the truth
> > > given
> > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing direct
> > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies
> that
> > > make
> > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > >
> > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
> mismatch
> > > and
> > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > >
> > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > > celebrate
> > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve minute
> > to
> > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as we
> > know
> > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality –
> > the
> > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > >
> > > > -Andrew
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Samuel Klein          @metasj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529
> 4266
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Andy Mabbett-2
The difference here being that it is not a professional system. If you mess with the crowd the crowd does not generally go where you prefer it to, it goes home.
Other potential contributors see what has been done, and decide not to waste their efforts where outsiders can throw their work away. (outsiders meaning people not from the project that is being closed).
Preserving as read only in another place is far more acceptable and indicates respect for one's efforts, even when times have changed. Internal deletion, change and general editing is a completely different issue. It is a given when you start. It is implied by CC-by-sa licence.
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Andy Mabbett
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 6:50 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 15:31, Peter Southwood
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Abandoning a project and shutting it down sends a message to all volunteers
> that their work could be similarly abandoned and lost one day.

For some value of "lost" - it's likely, in this case, that all the
content would be preserved, either by making the wiki read-only, or
perhaps migrating articles to, say, Wikisource.

Sure, things like some portal pages, templates and categories might be
discarded, but that can happen to the work of any of us, on any
project, anyway.

We have a related, but different, issue at Wikispecies .Technically at
least, that project is now (or could soon be, with a few tweaks)
wholly redundant to Wikidata, and could be populated using
Listeria-like scripts or templates, from what is held in Wikidata.

The Wikispecies community vehemently resist this, and respond with
suggestions that data in Wikispecies (held in a variety of templates,
as well as much unstructured prose) should be what is edited, and
should be used in a reverse of the above process to somehow magically
populate Wikidata.

So we continue to maintain versions of the same data on two (or more:
Wikipedias and Commons also do their own things with biological
taxonomy) vastly different projects, diluting the impact of all of our
volunteer-hours. Anyone who commissioned a system like this in a
professional capacity would be sacked for incompetence.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Vi to
Wait, wait. The risk to shut down to get enough consensus to shut down a
project with an active community which is not systematically violating any
fundamental principle is zero.

Vito

Il giorno gio 18 apr 2019 alle ore 10:45 Peter Southwood <
[hidden email]> ha scritto:

> The difference here being that it is not a professional system. If you
> mess with the crowd the crowd does not generally go where you prefer it to,
> it goes home.
> Other potential contributors see what has been done, and decide not to
> waste their efforts where outsiders can throw their work away. (outsiders
> meaning people not from the project that is being closed).
> Preserving as read only in another place is far more acceptable and
> indicates respect for one's efforts, even when times have changed. Internal
> deletion, change and general editing is a completely different issue. It is
> a given when you start. It is implied by CC-by-sa licence.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Andy Mabbett
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 6:50 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand
> system for our 2030 goals]
>
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 15:31, Peter Southwood
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Abandoning a project and shutting it down sends a message to all
> volunteers
> > that their work could be similarly abandoned and lost one day.
>
> For some value of "lost" - it's likely, in this case, that all the
> content would be preserved, either by making the wiki read-only, or
> perhaps migrating articles to, say, Wikisource.
>
> Sure, things like some portal pages, templates and categories might be
> discarded, but that can happen to the work of any of us, on any
> project, anyway.
>
> We have a related, but different, issue at Wikispecies .Technically at
> least, that project is now (or could soon be, with a few tweaks)
> wholly redundant to Wikidata, and could be populated using
> Listeria-like scripts or templates, from what is held in Wikidata.
>
> The Wikispecies community vehemently resist this, and respond with
> suggestions that data in Wikispecies (held in a variety of templates,
> as well as much unstructured prose) should be what is edited, and
> should be used in a reverse of the above process to somehow magically
> populate Wikidata.
>
> So we continue to maintain versions of the same data on two (or more:
> Wikipedias and Commons also do their own things with biological
> taxonomy) vastly different projects, diluting the impact of all of our
> volunteer-hours. Anyone who commissioned a system like this in a
> professional capacity would be sacked for incompetence.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Jennifer Pryor-Summers
In reply to this post by Peter Southwood
Peter

Our brand is already on it in these cases, and yes it would be sending a
> message - "We want you to risk your time and effort on our projects but we
> may later decide to discard everything you worked for"
>

I don;t think "discard" is right.  The message would be "... but if it
doesn't work out then we won't continue to waste your time and effort and
our donations indefinitely". That's realistic.

JPS
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
"your time and effort" is for those other people to waste. It is for them
to decide what value they derive from spending it in this way. "our
donations", donations is what donors offer. Once they have donated, it
becomes the money of the Wikimedia Foundation. It is not our donations, it
is not even our money.

Then consider the cost, to the Wikimedia Foundation. It is largely the cost
of serving the content, the management of the servers. In the big picture
it is not much, it is also very much a question on the inclusivity of the
Wikimedia Foundation that enables the continued existence of these
projects. With a Wikipedia community as a movement we will be excluding
others as we expel volunteers who are considered redundant because they do
not fit our image.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 18:20, Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Peter
>
> Our brand is already on it in these cases, and yes it would be sending a
> > message - "We want you to risk your time and effort on our projects but
> we
> > may later decide to discard everything you worked for"
> >
>
> I don;t think "discard" is right.  The message would be "... but if it
> doesn't work out then we won't continue to waste your time and effort and
> our donations indefinitely". That's realistic.
>
> JPS
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Jennifer Pryor-Summers
Gerard,

Not everything works out -- that's the way of the world.  Your argument
would imply that no project that had ever attracted anyone's time and
effort could ever be discontinued.  That is unsustainable.  The WMF has
limited resources and quite properly has to decide on priorities for
allocating its resources.  It also has to consider the non-monetary cost --
for example, damage to the reputation of the Foundation, of the movement it
leads, and the other projects it owns -- of continuing to support a project
that is clearly a failure.

JPS.

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 7:18 AM Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hoi,
> "your time and effort" is for those other people to waste. It is for them
> to decide what value they derive from spending it in this way. "our
> donations", donations is what donors offer. Once they have donated, it
> becomes the money of the Wikimedia Foundation. It is not our donations, it
> is not even our money.
>
> Then consider the cost, to the Wikimedia Foundation. It is largely the cost
> of serving the content, the management of the servers. In the big picture
> it is not much, it is also very much a question on the inclusivity of the
> Wikimedia Foundation that enables the continued existence of these
> projects. With a Wikipedia community as a movement we will be excluding
> others as we expel volunteers who are considered redundant because they do
> not fit our image.
> Thanks,
>       GerardM
>
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 18:20, Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Peter
> >
> > Our brand is already on it in these cases, and yes it would be sending a
> > > message - "We want you to risk your time and effort on our projects but
> > we
> > > may later decide to discard everything you worked for"
> > >
> >
> > I don;t think "discard" is right.  The message would be "... but if it
> > doesn't work out then we won't continue to waste your time and effort and
> > our donations indefinitely". That's realistic.
> >
> > JPS
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Paulo Santos Perneta
In reply to this post by Peter Southwood
Sad memories of Orkut, Panoramio, and all the unvaluable repositories of
online knowledge that have been completely destroyed in the recent past,
because they were doomed as uncompetitive by big corporations as Google. I
seriously hope we don't go that way. 😟

Paulo

Peter Southwood <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia quinta,
18/04/2019 à(s) 09:34:

> Our brand is already on it in these cases, and yes it would be sending a
> message - "We want you to risk your time and effort on our projects but we
> may later decide to discard everything you worked for"
> Cheers,
> P
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Jennifer Pryor-Summers
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 8:19 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand
> system for our 2030 goals]
>
> Peter
>
> Putting your brand on a project that is visibly failing also sends out a
> message, to the world at large.  Is that a message you want to broadcast?
>
> JPS
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 3:32 PM Peter Southwood <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Abandoning a project and shutting it down sends a message to all
> > volunteers that their work could be similarly abandoned and lost one day.
> > Is that a message we want to broadcast?
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> > Behalf Of Ziko van Dijk
> > Sent: 17 April 2019 00:46
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand
> > system for our 2030 goals]
> >
> > Hello,
> > Some years ago, some volunteers have proposed a new Wikimedia wiki. It
> did
> > not turn out as expected. That‘s okay, the movement should try out thing
> > from time to time.
> > But this wiki should not be seen as an eternal obligation to be kept.
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> >
> > Samuel Klein <[hidden email]> schrieb am Di. 16. Apr. 2019 um 23:56:
> >
> > > Jennifer -- as you say, there is a contradiction here in the self-image
> > and
> > > internal narrative of the projects and movement.  A classic branding
> > issue
> > > ;)
> > > * On the one hand, we lack clear, consistent language to talk about
> > topical
> > > subprojects (what do you call 'the Current Events specialists on the
> > major
> > > language Wikpiedias'?  some obvious names have already been taken)
> > > * On the other, for the few Names that we assign to Projects, we
> > > overspecify what they mean ('Wikinews is original news reporting or
> > > synthesis, done on a wikinews.org site').
> > >
> > > We propagate this confusion of identity to those outside the projects
> > > trying to understand them; which in turn leads to misunderstanding in
> the
> > > world at large, and fewer potential collaborators joining the projects:
> > >      I was recently at a gathering of international fact-checkers.
>  They
> > > all prized Wikipedia as a model for what rapid collective editing can
> > > accomplish; assumed wikinews and wikitribune were the best efforts to
> > date
> > > of applying that to current events; and began an enthusiastic
> discussion
> > > about how to do it better.  When I pointed out that Wikipedias did
> > exactly
> > > what they were discussing, for the most popular news, this was
> startling
> > > and satisfying to them.  However as there is no central cafe or village
> > > pump for current events editors, and what portals do exist are
> impossible
> > > to find for all but the most persistent, it is not obvious how to
> engage
> > > with them...
> > >
> > > This is a challenge of naming + identity that really holds us back:
> ways
> > > for people to form groups, projects, message streams; and channel,
> > > advertise, amplify, polish them; use them for flash projects and
> > > coalescence, for awareness and thanks.  We have tried many small steps
> in
> > > this direction but have never made groups or hashtags work as simple,
> > > functional tools of alignment.
> > >
> > > SJ
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > > that
> > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
> are a
> > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> > Wikipedia
> > > is
> > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to
> > me.
> > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward
> > is
> > > to
> > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > > >
> > > > JPS
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> > Wikipedia
> > > > > seems
> > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent
> with
> > > its
> > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> > > should
> > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > >
> > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the
> > vast
> > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
> > Wikinews
> > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > properties.
> > > > >
> > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the
> truth
> > > > given
> > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> direct
> > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies
> > that
> > > > make
> > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > >
> > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
> > mismatch
> > > > and
> > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > > > celebrate
> > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve
> minute
> > > to
> > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as
> we
> > > know
> > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality
> –
> > > the
> > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > [2]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > >
> > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Samuel Klein          @metasj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529
> > 4266
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > https://www.avg.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Andy Mabbett-2
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 at 16:48, Paulo Santos Perneta
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Sad memories of Orkut, Panoramio, and all the unvaluable repositories of
> online knowledge that have been completely destroyed in the recent past,
> because they were doomed as uncompetitive by big corporations as Google. I
> seriously hope we don't go that way.

I can think of at least two precedents that show that we are better
than that: the Kilingon Wikipedia and the 9/11 memorial wiki.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by Jennifer Pryor-Summers
Perception is in the eye of the beholder,
Cheers,
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jennifer Pryor-Summers
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 6:20 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Peter

Our brand is already on it in these cases, and yes it would be sending a
> message - "We want you to risk your time and effort on our projects but we
> may later decide to discard everything you worked for"
>

I don;t think "discard" is right.  The message would be "... but if it
doesn't work out then we won't continue to waste your time and effort and
our donations indefinitely". That's realistic.

JPS
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Philippe Beaudette-4
In reply to this post by Andrew Lih
The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:

I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.

[1]
https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel

Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done
very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use
for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine
addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think that
given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
that spot.

But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.

Philippe

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Andrew
> >
> > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> that
> > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a
> > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand, Wikipedia
> is
> > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to me.
>
>
> As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than primary
> source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
>
> I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
>
> [1]
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
>
>
> > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward is
> to
> > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
>
>
> Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
> editors are already doing a stellar job.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia
> > > seems
> > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with
> its
> > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> should
> > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Jennifer,
> > >
> > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the vast
> > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that Wikinews
> > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> properties.
> > >
> > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the truth
> > given
> > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing direct
> > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies that
> > make
> > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > >
> > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > >
> > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this mismatch
> > and
> > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > >
> > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > celebrate
> > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve minute
> to
> > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as we
> know
> > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality –
> the
> > > Wikipedia article.
> > >
> > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > [2]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > >
> > > -Andrew
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> --
> -Andrew Lih
> Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> University, Columbia University, USC
> ---
> Email: [hidden email]
> WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Ziko van Dijk-3
Hello,

One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
suitable for collaboration.

Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
library.

When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
little more.

Kind regards
Ziko



Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
<[hidden email]>:

>
> The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
>
> I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
>
> [1]
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
>
> Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done
> very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use
> for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine
> addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think that
> given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
> that spot.
>
> But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.
>
> Philippe
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > that
> > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a
> > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand, Wikipedia
> > is
> > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to me.
> >
> >
> > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than primary
> > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
> >
> > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> >
> > [1]
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> >
> >
> > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward is
> > to
> > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> >
> >
> > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
> > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia
> > > > seems
> > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with
> > its
> > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> > should
> > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jennifer,
> > > >
> > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the vast
> > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that Wikinews
> > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > properties.
> > > >
> > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the truth
> > > given
> > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing direct
> > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies that
> > > make
> > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > >
> > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this mismatch
> > > and
> > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > >
> > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > > celebrate
> > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve minute
> > to
> > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as we
> > know
> > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality –
> > the
> > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > >
> > > > -Andrew
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > --
> > -Andrew Lih
> > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > University, Columbia University, USC
> > ---
> > Email: [hidden email]
> > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Philippe Beaudette-4
Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact
check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.

That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success stories,
but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many roles
for community there.

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> suitable for collaboration.
>
> Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> library.
>
> When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> little more.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
> Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> >
> > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> >
> > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done
> > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use
> > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine
> > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think that
> > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
> > that spot.
> >
> > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > > that
> > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
> are a
> > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> Wikipedia
> > > is
> > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to
> me.
> > >
> > >
> > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than
> primary
> > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
> > >
> > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> direct
> > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > >
> > >
> > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
> forward is
> > > to
> > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > >
> > >
> > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
> > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> Wikipedia
> > > > > seems
> > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent
> with
> > > its
> > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> > > should
> > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > >
> > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the
> vast
> > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
> Wikinews
> > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > properties.
> > > > >
> > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the
> truth
> > > > given
> > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> direct
> > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies
> that
> > > > make
> > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > >
> > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
> mismatch
> > > > and
> > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > > > celebrate
> > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve
> minute
> > > to
> > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as
> we
> > > know
> > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality
> –
> > > the
> > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > [2]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > >
> > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Andrew Lih
> > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > > University, Columbia University, USC
> > > ---
> > > Email: [hidden email]
> > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

--
Philippe Beaudette
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Philippe Beaudette-4
(Hit send too early).    To my mind the larger problem is that the content
becomes static over time, Rather than growing and evolving as it does with
many of our more successful Projects.

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:25 AM Philippe Beaudette <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact
> check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
>
> That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success
> stories, but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are
> many roles for community there.
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
>> suitable for collaboration.
>>
>> Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
>> the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
>> on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
>> library.
>>
>> When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
>> is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
>> the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
>> little more.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Ziko
>>
>>
>>
>> Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
>> <[hidden email]>:
>> >
>> > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
>> >
>> > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
>> > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
>> direct
>> > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
>> >
>> > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always
>> done
>> > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional,
>> use
>> > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a
>> fine
>> > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think
>> that
>> > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
>> > that spot.
>> >
>> > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.
>> >
>> > Philippe
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
>> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Andrew
>> > > >
>> > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the
>> policies
>> > > that
>> > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
>> are a
>> > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
>> Wikipedia
>> > > is
>> > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent
>> to me.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than
>> primary
>> > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
>> > >
>> > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
>> > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
>> direct
>> > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
>> > >
>> > > [1]
>> > >
>> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
>> forward is
>> > > to
>> > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
>> > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
>> > >
>> > > Andrew
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
>> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
>> Wikipedia
>> > > > > seems
>> > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent
>> with
>> > > its
>> > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
>> > > should
>> > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Jennifer,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and
>> the vast
>> > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
>> Wikinews
>> > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
>> > > properties.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the
>> truth
>> > > > given
>> > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
>> direct
>> > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies
>> that
>> > > > make
>> > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
>> > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
>> > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
>> > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
>> mismatch
>> > > > and
>> > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
>> > > > celebrate
>> > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve
>> minute
>> > > to
>> > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as
>> we
>> > > know
>> > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of
>> reality –
>> > > the
>> > > > > Wikipedia article.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins
>> of
>> > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
>> > > > > [1]
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
>> > > > > [2]
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
>> > > > >
>> > > > > -Andrew
>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
>> > > > > Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
>> ?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
>> > > > Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
>> ?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > -Andrew Lih
>> > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
>> > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
>> > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
>> > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
>> > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
>> > > University, Columbia University, USC
>> > > ---
>> > > Email: [hidden email]
>> > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
>> > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> ,
>> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> --
> Philippe Beaudette
> [hidden email]
>
--
Philippe Beaudette
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Joseph Seddon-4
In reply to this post by Ziko van Dijk-3
What are the examples of successful citizen news websites?

What could we learn from them?


On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 5:15 PM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> suitable for collaboration.
>
> Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> library.
>
> When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> little more.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
> Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> >
> > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> >
> > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done
> > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use
> > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine
> > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think that
> > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
> > that spot.
> >
> > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > > that
> > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
> are a
> > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> Wikipedia
> > > is
> > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to
> me.
> > >
> > >
> > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than
> primary
> > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
> > >
> > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> direct
> > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > >
> > >
> > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
> forward is
> > > to
> > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > >
> > >
> > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
> > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> Wikipedia
> > > > > seems
> > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent
> with
> > > its
> > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> > > should
> > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > >
> > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the
> vast
> > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
> Wikinews
> > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > properties.
> > > > >
> > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the
> truth
> > > > given
> > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> direct
> > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies
> that
> > > > make
> > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > >
> > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
> mismatch
> > > > and
> > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > > > celebrate
> > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve
> minute
> > > to
> > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as
> we
> > > know
> > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality
> –
> > > the
> > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > [2]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > >
> > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Andrew Lih
> > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > > University, Columbia University, USC
> > > ---
> > > Email: [hidden email]
> > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Ziko van Dijk-3
In reply to this post by Philippe Beaudette-4
Hello Philippe,

Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.

Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
(which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).

Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
"euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
to the world that has to be described.

That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
don't need (another) website offering this.

Another example for content unsuitable for
wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.

An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
far here.

Kind regards
Ziko

Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
<[hidden email]>:

>
> Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact
> check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
>
> That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success stories,
> but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many roles
> for community there.
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > suitable for collaboration.
> >
> > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > library.
> >
> > When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> > is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> > the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> > little more.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> > >
> > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > >
> > > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done
> > > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use
> > > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine
> > > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think that
> > > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
> > > that spot.
> > >
> > > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.
> > >
> > > Philippe
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > > > that
> > > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
> > are a
> > > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> > Wikipedia
> > > > is
> > > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to
> > me.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than
> > primary
> > > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
> > > >
> > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> > direct
> > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
> > forward is
> > > > to
> > > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
> > > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> > Wikipedia
> > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent
> > with
> > > > its
> > > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> > > > should
> > > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the
> > vast
> > > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
> > Wikinews
> > > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > > properties.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the
> > truth
> > > > > given
> > > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> > direct
> > > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies
> > that
> > > > > make
> > > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
> > mismatch
> > > > > and
> > > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > > > > celebrate
> > > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve
> > minute
> > > > to
> > > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as
> > we
> > > > know
> > > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality
> > –
> > > > the
> > > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > > [2]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -Andrew Lih
> > > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > > > University, Columbia University, USC
> > > > ---
> > > > Email: [hidden email]
> > > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> --
> Philippe Beaudette
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Yaroslav Blanter
Hi Ziko,

you could then argue that Commons is also not a collaborative project -
only one person takes a picture (determines the story, the position, light
etc), and others can at best perform some editing or add/remove categories.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Philippe,
>
> Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
> is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.
>
> Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
> collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
> aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
> (which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).
>
> Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
> and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
> Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
> "euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
> been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
> to the world that has to be described.
>
> That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
> material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
> believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
> don't need (another) website offering this.
>
> Another example for content unsuitable for
> wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
> by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
> her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
> wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
> etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
> right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.
>
> An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
> collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
> far here.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
> Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact
> > check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
> >
> > That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success
> stories,
> > but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many
> roles
> > for community there.
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > > suitable for collaboration.
> > >
> > > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > > library.
> > >
> > > When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> > > is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> > > the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> > > little more.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Ziko
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > > <[hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> > > >
> > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> direct
> > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > >
> > > > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always
> done
> > > > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite
> functional, use
> > > > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a
> fine
> > > > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think
> that
> > > > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to
> fill
> > > > that spot.
> > > >
> > > > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it
> isn't.
> > > >
> > > > Philippe
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the
> policies
> > > > > that
> > > > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
> > > are a
> > > > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > > is
> > > > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem
> inconsistent to
> > > me.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than
> > > primary
> > > > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews
> with
> > > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> > > direct
> > > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
> > > forward is
> > > > > to
> > > > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public.
> Wikipedia
> > > > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely
> consistent
> > > with
> > > > > its
> > > > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the
> WMF
> > > > > should
> > > > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and
> the
> > > vast
> > > > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
> > > Wikinews
> > > > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > > > properties.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the
> > > truth
> > > > > > given
> > > > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> > > direct
> > > > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following
> policies
> > > that
> > > > > > make
> > > > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
> > > mismatch
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we
> should
> > > > > > celebrate
> > > > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve
> > > minute
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world
> as
> > > we
> > > > > know
> > > > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of
> reality
> > > –
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the
> origins of
> > > > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > -Andrew Lih
> > > > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > > > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > > > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > > > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > > > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > > > > University, Columbia University, USC
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Email: [hidden email]
> > > > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > > > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > --
> > Philippe Beaudette
> > [hidden email]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Jennifer Pryor-Summers
Yaroslav

I think you have identified an important point -- I hestitate to call it a
problem -- about Commons.  We are dependent on the authority of the
uploader of an image, say, to say what it is an image of.  If they say it
is a certain locality, or object, we have to take their word for it (or
not, of course).  That doesn't fit too well with the requirement on other
projects for citation of reliable independent sources.

Jennifer

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:34 AM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Ziko,
>
> you could then argue that Commons is also not a collaborative project -
> only one person takes a picture (determines the story, the position, light
> etc), and others can at best perform some editing or add/remove categories.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello Philippe,
> >
> > Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
> > is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.
> >
> > Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
> > collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
> > aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
> > (which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).
> >
> > Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
> > and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
> > Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
> > "euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
> > been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
> > to the world that has to be described.
> >
> > That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
> > material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
> > believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
> > don't need (another) website offering this.
> >
> > Another example for content unsuitable for
> > wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
> > by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
> > her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
> > wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
> > etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
> > right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.
> >
> > An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
> > collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
> > far here.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and
> fact
> > > check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
> > >
> > > That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success
> > stories,
> > > but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many
> > roles
> > > for community there.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > > > suitable for collaboration.
> > > >
> > > > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > > > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > > > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > > > library.
> > > >
> > > > When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> > > > is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> > > > the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> > > > little more.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Ziko
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > > > <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews
> with
> > > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> > direct
> > > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > > >
> > > > > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has
> always
> > done
> > > > > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite
> > functional, use
> > > > > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be
> a
> > fine
> > > > > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to
> think
> > that
> > > > > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to
> > fill
> > > > > that spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it
> > isn't.
> > > > >
> > > > > Philippe
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the
> > policies
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V,
> NORUSH)
> > > > are a
> > > > > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem
> > inconsistent to
> > > > me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather
> than
> > > > primary
> > > > > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies
> primarily.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews
> > with
> > > > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as
> a
> > > > direct
> > > > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
> > > > forward is
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public.
> > Wikipedia
> > > > > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely
> > consistent
> > > > with
> > > > > > its
> > > > > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe
> the
> > WMF
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade
> and
> > the
> > > > vast
> > > > > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion
> that
> > > > Wikinews
> > > > > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > > > > properties.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of
> the
> > > > truth
> > > > > > > given
> > > > > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> > > > direct
> > > > > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following
> > policies
> > > > that
> > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline
> reporting:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience
> this
> > > > mismatch
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we
> > should
> > > > > > > celebrate
> > > > > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that
> evolve
> > > > minute
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the
> world
> > as
> > > > we
> > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of
> > reality
> > > > –
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the
> > origins of
> > > > > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > -Andrew Lih
> > > > > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > > > > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > > > > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > > > > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > > > > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > > > > > University, Columbia University, USC
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > Email: [hidden email]
> > > > > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > > > > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Philippe Beaudette
> > > [hidden email]
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Ziko van Dijk-3
In reply to this post by Yaroslav Blanter
Yes indeed, Wikimedia Commons sees not much of collaboration in that sense.
The collaboration on Commons is of an insular kind: people don't
(much) edit other people's work, but they together contribute to the
whole wiki.
Different is collaboration where several people edit the same content
and have sometimes to discuss about choices.  But on Commons, there is
no need for that. It does not have a macrostructure in which every
item (hypertext node, article) has to be unique. In Commons, if you
see a picture of the Notre Dame cathedral and you don't like it, you
simply upload your own. Different to Wikipedia: if you see the article
"Elephant", and you don't like it, you cannot simply create a new one.

The problem is that we use the word "collaboration" often without
distinction for several kinds of collaboration.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Sa., 27. Apr. 2019 um 12:34 Uhr schrieb Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]>:

>
> Hi Ziko,
>
> you could then argue that Commons is also not a collaborative project -
> only one person takes a picture (determines the story, the position, light
> etc), and others can at best perform some editing or add/remove categories.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello Philippe,
> >
> > Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
> > is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.
> >
> > Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
> > collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
> > aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
> > (which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).
> >
> > Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
> > and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
> > Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
> > "euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
> > been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
> > to the world that has to be described.
> >
> > That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
> > material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
> > believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
> > don't need (another) website offering this.
> >
> > Another example for content unsuitable for
> > wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
> > by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
> > her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
> > wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
> > etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
> > right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.
> >
> > An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
> > collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
> > far here.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact
> > > check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
> > >
> > > That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success
> > stories,
> > > but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many
> > roles
> > > for community there.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > > > suitable for collaboration.
> > > >
> > > > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > > > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > > > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > > > library.
> > > >
> > > > When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> > > > is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> > > > the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> > > > little more.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Ziko
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > > > <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> > direct
> > > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > > >
> > > > > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always
> > done
> > > > > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite
> > functional, use
> > > > > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a
> > fine
> > > > > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think
> > that
> > > > > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to
> > fill
> > > > > that spot.
> > > > >
> > > > > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it
> > isn't.
> > > > >
> > > > > Philippe
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the
> > policies
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
> > > > are a
> > > > > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem
> > inconsistent to
> > > > me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than
> > > > primary
> > > > > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews
> > with
> > > > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> > > > direct
> > > > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
> > > > forward is
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public.
> > Wikipedia
> > > > > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely
> > consistent
> > > > with
> > > > > > its
> > > > > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the
> > WMF
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and
> > the
> > > > vast
> > > > > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that
> > > > Wikinews
> > > > > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > > > > properties.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the
> > > > truth
> > > > > > > given
> > > > > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> > > > direct
> > > > > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following
> > policies
> > > > that
> > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this
> > > > mismatch
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we
> > should
> > > > > > > celebrate
> > > > > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve
> > > > minute
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world
> > as
> > > > we
> > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of
> > reality
> > > > –
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the
> > origins of
> > > > > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > -Andrew Lih
> > > > > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > > > > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > > > > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > > > > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > > > > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > > > > > University, Columbia University, USC
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > Email: [hidden email]
> > > > > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > > > > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Philippe Beaudette
> > > [hidden email]
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Ziko van Dijk-3
In reply to this post by Jennifer Pryor-Summers
That is an excellent point, Jennifer! This problem makes collaboration
on Commons even more difficult or unlikely.
The photographer sometimes has an unique access to the part of the
world he described with a picture. Often on Commons we simply ask the
photographer: 'where did you take the picture', or 'what is the
context' etc., because we cannot see that from the picture itself or
we cannot look it up by ourselves.
I think with wiki journalism it is quite similar.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Sa., 27. Apr. 2019 um 13:15 Uhr schrieb Jennifer Pryor-Summers
<[hidden email]>:

>
> Yaroslav
>
> I think you have identified an important point -- I hestitate to call it a
> problem -- about Commons.  We are dependent on the authority of the
> uploader of an image, say, to say what it is an image of.  If they say it
> is a certain locality, or object, we have to take their word for it (or
> not, of course).  That doesn't fit too well with the requirement on other
> projects for citation of reliable independent sources.
>
> Jennifer
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:34 AM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ziko,
> >
> > you could then argue that Commons is also not a collaborative project -
> > only one person takes a picture (determines the story, the position, light
> > etc), and others can at best perform some editing or add/remove categories.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Philippe,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
> > > is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.
> > >
> > > Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
> > > collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
> > > aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
> > > (which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).
> > >
> > > Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
> > > and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
> > > Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
> > > "euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
> > > been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
> > > to the world that has to be described.
> > >
> > > That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
> > > material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
> > > believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
> > > don't need (another) website offering this.
> > >
> > > Another example for content unsuitable for
> > > wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
> > > by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
> > > her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
> > > wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
> > > etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
> > > right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.
> > >
> > > An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
> > > collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
> > > far here.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Ziko
> > >
> > > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > > <[hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and
> > fact
> > > > check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
> > > >
> > > > That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success
> > > stories,
> > > > but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many
> > > roles
> > > > for community there.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > > > > suitable for collaboration.
> > > > >
> > > > > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > > > > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > > > > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > > > > library.
> > > > >
> > > > > When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> > > > > is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> > > > > the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> > > > > little more.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > Ziko
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > > > > <[hidden email]>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews
> > with
> > > > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a
> > > direct
> > > > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has
> > always
> > > done
> > > > > > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite
> > > functional, use
> > > > > > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be
> > a
> > > fine
> > > > > > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to
> > think
> > > that
> > > > > > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to
> > > fill
> > > > > > that spot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it
> > > isn't.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Philippe
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the
> > > policies
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V,
> > NORUSH)
> > > > > are a
> > > > > > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> > > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem
> > > inconsistent to
> > > > > me.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather
> > than
> > > > > primary
> > > > > > > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies
> > primarily.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews
> > > with
> > > > > > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as
> > a
> > > > > direct
> > > > > > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way
> > > > > forward is
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public.
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language)
> > > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely
> > > consistent
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > its
> > > > > > > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe
> > the
> > > WMF
> > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jennifer,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade
> > and
> > > the
> > > > > vast
> > > > > > > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion
> > that
> > > > > Wikinews
> > > > > > > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > > > > > > properties.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of
> > the
> > > > > truth
> > > > > > > > given
> > > > > > > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing
> > > > > direct
> > > > > > > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following
> > > policies
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline
> > reporting:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > > > > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > > > > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > > > > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience
> > this
> > > > > mismatch
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we
> > > should
> > > > > > > > celebrate
> > > > > > > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that
> > evolve
> > > > > minute
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the
> > world
> > > as
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of
> > > reality
> > > > > –
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the
> > > origins of
> > > > > > > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > -Andrew Lih
> > > > > > > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > > > > > > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > > > > > > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > > > > > > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > > > > > > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > > > > > > University, Columbia University, USC
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > Email: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > > > > > > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Philippe Beaudette
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
123