Hi,
This something that could interest the whole Wikinews community, and
could help us if we collaborate as one.
the thread is here : http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/
Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous#Money
a copy/paste follow :
> Money
>
> The Knight Foundation plans to give a total of $5 million for
> projects that show how online news can tranform community life.
> 23:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
>
> * I found a fundraising suggestions section of the Metawiki.
> Might be a good idea for someone to go there and suggest it. --
> Apartmento2 02:20, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
>
> I've consequently posted it: $5 million from Knight
> Foundation.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 12:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
>
> Be bold and do it - create a Knight foundation proposal and go
> for it. Just don't involve anyone outside the wikinews community.
> Meta and the WMF in general are not going to help you anywhere. Let
> no one stop you from submitting a proposal yourself. Dedalus 19:57,
> 26 October 2006 (UTC)
> i suggest this information to be posted on the Wikinews-I
> mailing list. An international collaboration could be a plus,no???
> Jacques Divol 20:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
> i don't know but i think we must also contact Wikimedia board
> should be mandatory before applying more than meta in fact ???
> no ??? Jacques Divol 20:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
do we need Board Autorization to register wikinews here http://
www2.knightfdn.org/newschallenge/home.html#home ?
is the Board could help Wikinews in this case ?
jacques divol
This entire thing (for thoose who don't know what i'm talking about,
see (en)WC and http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Category_talk:Israel ,
basicly PVJ wants to put a line on cat Israel saying that some
countries don't recognize its exsitance) has gone on far to long.
First of all the dispute itself is going in circles, and I don't like
arguments that arn't getting anywhere, but secondly Its starting to
attract attention at wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Israel&direction=prev&oldid=…
and I'm worried we may have a giant flamefest + a mob from wikipedia
on our hands. I don't know how to get a solution all parties agree on,
but we need something quite quickly imo.
Bawolff
I don't know. What prevents people from purposely foreshadowing? Like, I was
looking at a millennium terror alert article in Time, and Bin Laden was only
one of eight people to be afraid of. A "Supplementary" Wikinews could put
much greater evidence on him, giving bias to the then distant future of
2001.
Or if I were to report on the release of the Massey Commission (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Commission ), what's to stop me from
focusing the serious and still relevant report up for laughs, by
highlighting the newspaper industry's fear of facsimile machines cutting
into their profits? This was not the highlight of the report, yet to a
modern nerd, it very well might be.
Nick
"The vigorous brief of the Canadian Daily Newspapers Association was devoted
entirely to a discussion of the consequences to the present newspaper
business if the new device of facsimile broadcasting should become, as seems
possible, an effective and popular rival to newspapers as we know them. We
can claim only an imperfect knowledge of this new medium of communication.
In brief, as we understand it, this process can deliver directly into the
home a printed newspaper as readily and by essentially the same means as
radio and television are now received. No printing machinery or delivery
services are needed, and any radio station could go into the newspaper
business for a small fraction of the investment required to establish a
normal newspaper. The Canadian Daily Newspapers Association states that this
development will attract newcomers to the newspaper field, and that the
facsimile reader will be able in his home to dial any one of several
newspapers just as now he tunes his receiving set to radio programmes."
http://www.collectionscanada.ca/massey/h5-412-e.html
Greetings to the mailing list!
A short while back, I thought that since Wikinews only goes back to November
2004, that is far from the kind of comprehensive current events archive we
want to be. Compare less than two years of archive to the New York Times's
history of hundreds of years. While in a hundred years Wikinews will look
far more comprehensive, NYT will look even -more- comprehensive.
In addition, I have access to databases containing news articles from the
New York Times, as well as other newspapers. I could use this to fill in the
gap -- create articles on events from before November 2004, as well as
during 2004 and 2005 when our coverage has been a bit spotty. Any of these
articles would go through a different process: while they would be part of
date categories, they would use {{supp develop}} in lieu of {{develop}} and
{{supp publish}} in lieu of {{publish}} (both tag the articles as part of
"Supplementary Wikinews" and put them into the No Publish and Supplementary
Wikinews categories). After the article is finished and tagged with {{supp
publish}}, it would spend a short amount of time to be looked over by
others, then protected as part of the archive.
I understand that the idea of Wikinews is that news stories are written
based on knowledge at the time, so that future generations can see what we
know and what we think. That's why I would aim to limit myself to using
verbatim scans/copies of newspapers I have access to -- I highly doubt those
get modified. I also understand that the databases may carry only American
newspapers -- unless someone knows where I may find foreign newspapers,
there's nothing I can do about it.
Any thoughts?
Do to some recent confusion about overlaps of attendance of events (at
wikinews), theres now a new page for coordinating event attendance,
and I thought it probably should be announced on the mailing list:
Summary from the page:
Anyone planning to schedule attendance at an event, as a
representative of Wikinews or Wikimedia Commons, should announce their
plans as soon as possible on [[meta:Scheduled attendance for Wikinews
or Commons]] , in order to not cause unnecessary overlap. Formally
arranged coverage is best registered here. This is not necessary if
you're attending informally, such as a tourist attraction, a protest,
etc.
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Water_cooler#Page_for_coordinationhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scheduled_attendance_for_Wikinews_or_Commons
-bawolff
Hi,
I'd like to delegate the task of coordinating Wikinews language
editions. The task consists of the following:
1) Keep an eye on
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/Start_a_new_edition
for language editions which have at least 5 supporters.
2) When that threshold is reached, contact the supporters and ask them
to prepare the necessary translations / page creations at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_language_pre-launch
3) Keep an eye on that page as well for editions which are ready to go.
4) When an edition is ready to go, file a site request at
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/
For bonus points: A new language edition initially needs to have
uploads enabled until it uploads its own logo, then uploads need to be
disabled until a fair use policy is established that clarifies under
which circumstances users are allowed to upload files.
Wikinews editions also need to be licensed under CC-BY, not GFDL.
Beyond acting on your own, you would also be the first point of
contact for all questions about the process. I'd be happy to go
through it with you once more via Skype or phone.
If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please contact me
privately at erik AT wikimedia DOT org, and I will try to pick the
person a) most qualified and b) most likely to do the work. ;-)
--
Peace & Love,
Erik
Member, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, all views or opinions expressed
in this message are solely my own and do not represent an official
position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
I suggest the following policy:
When a Wikinews edition has seen no new stories for 8 weeks, the wiki
is locked and a site notice is added: "This Wikinews edition is
currently inactive. If you are interested in working on it, please
indicate so on [[m:Wikinews/Reactivate an edition]]." (In the correct
language, of course.) Instead of just 5 votes, you would need 10
Wikimedians to sign the reactivation pledge.
Inactive editions could also be removed from the interlanguage link
list on the Main Pages, but that would be optional if it's too much
maintenance.
There are currently a few Wikinewses that meet this criterion. In
general our setup policy tends to at least determine whether there's a
general interest but that doesn't ensure that people keep posting.
Without such a policy, I think we are just turning these sites into
magnets for vandalism and spam, as well as making Wikinews look
unprofessional (a news site with news that are a year old isn't much
of one). An open recognition that an edition is dead seems preferable
to me.
Wikinews is of course very special in this regard because it doesn't
really matter that much if a Wikipedia edition is dead for a couple of
months, but for Wikinews, it is a very obvious sign that the critical
mass is not there.
Does this policy proposal sound reasonable?
--
Peace & Love,
Erik
Member, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, all views or opinions expressed
in this message are solely my own and do not represent an official
position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
For those confused by my prior mail, I received an email from the brother of
the Secretary killed in India who found our coverage.
Did anyone else get a mail from the guy?
Brian.
My apologies if I have in any way offended you Mr Dessoy, that was not my
intent. Nor was I in any way morbidly interested in the recent death of your
sister.
The story was submitted to wikinews by another contributor, and my interest in
the age of your sister was due to the various sources used having conflicting
information. I stress, it was the accuracy of the report I was interested in.
My condolences to you for your loss, and I hope you can accept my apology for
any inadvertently caused upset.
Brian McNeil.
From: SMTP%"wikinews-l(a)Wikimedia.org" "Wikinews mailing list" 28-SEP-2006 19:23:21.23
Subj: [Wikinews-l] Semantic MediaWiki and Wikinews
From: "Erik Moeller" <erik(a)Wikimedia.org>
>a while ago I asked the folks from the Semantic MediaWiki project to
>look into how they feel the SMW extension could be put to use on
>Wikinews. This could be part of a larger strategy to examine whether
>SMW could/should be deployed within the Wikimedia project family.
>Please see:
>
>http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Wikinews
>
>for their report. If you are unfamiliar with Semantic MediaWiki, please see
>
>http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki
This does look interesting, but I have one question.
Assuming we take an existing Infobox such as the Today's news one could this
combined with various other parts of Wikicode allow a default Infobox that the
user could customise?
I'm thinking, along the lines of
if the user has a page User:{{USERNAME}}/TodayPrefs then its content is
displayed in the infobox otherwise a default is presented.
Actually, there's a whole slew of questions that could be asked about how this
can be used so I'd say it should be nominated to be installed on en.wikinews
and we see what can be done with it.
Brian.