[WikiEN-l] Reddi's POV edits of Current Events

Thu Nov 20 08:14:54 UTC 2003

Erik wrote:
>I would support an official warning to the effect that:
>- POV language needs to be avoided -- will everyone 
>agree with the summary?
>- Sources should be reasonably objective, e.g. Voice of 
>America is a US government funded operation, and AP/
>Reuters are therefore preferable 
>- "Current events" should concentrate on factual information, 
>not mere statements of opinion
>- When available, summaries should contain facts/"opinions" 
>from all relevant sides

I was about to write a reply to James' post saying pretty much the same thing. 
Ditto for what you wrote about the entertainment news problem. The release of 
a major new film is news, however. It's already reported on the day and year 
pages. More entries can be added to the month pages, so naturally less 
significant events can be mentioned a bit more often than they would 
otherwise be on a year or day page. 

No need to be "hard news" zealots (although not nearly as much space should be 
given to soft/entertainment news as hard news on [[current events]]). 

I imagine that we will eventually need to have a [[current entertainment 
news]] daughter article of the [[current events]] page. Their "archives" 
would be [[{month} {year} in entertainment]]. The detail can go there, but 
really significant entertainment news would also get a mention on the regular 
[[current events]]/[[{month} {year}]] article. But I don't forsee us needing 
such a page for a while (such a page could also degenerate into celebrity 
gossip "news" a la the Enquirer in the US or The Sun in the UK - that would 
be bad IMO). 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)