[Foundation-l] Re: Swedish, Spanish, French Wikinews set up

Sat Jan 29 15:31:27 UTC 2005

Erik Moeller a écrit:
> Anthere schrieb:
> 
>> I would appreciate greatly that when you create a new wikinews, you 
>> take care of updating the wikinews page, which is currently stating 
>> that only en and de exist.
> 
> 
> No, it accurately lists all Wikinews sites. The section you cite only 
> served as an example for the naming structure to be used, not as a 
> complete list of Wikinews sites. That list is right at the beginning, at
> 
>    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews#Wikinews_sites

I thank you and Angela for the edits made today, which clarifies this.

> and I updated it after the creation of the wikis. There's obviously no 
> point to maintaining two such lists on the same page.
> 
>> I do not see where these steps are respected here. In particular, I do 
>> not see the names of the five regular editors supporting the french 
>> version.
> 
> 
> Much of your discussion with Angela centers around what qualification is 
> sufficient in order to be counted as a likely participant in the 
> project. Now, a lot can be said about this subject, but please remember 
> that we haven't had this discussion yet -- this is the first time these 
> actual, formal criteria are being discussed. The only thing that is 
> stated on the Wikinews page is
> 
>    "Before a Wikinews language version is officially recognized as a
>    Wikimedia project, and before the first sysop can be appointed,
>    there must at least be 5 participants. "
> 
> 
> The requirement stated on the proposed "Policy for New Languages" page is:
> 
>    "There needs to be at least 5 users pledged to start up the wiki."
> 
> That page also states that there needs to be a "reporter", but this 
> seems to be particularly controversial, so I have omitted it from the 
> Wikinews requirements.
> 
> Now, should we go by a) or b)? If we go by a), then we should wait with 
> "recognizing" the French, Swedish and Spanish editions as Wikinews 
> projects until they have the required number of active participants. I'm 
> happy to do that, though I am not quite sure what it means in practice. 
> If we go by b), then, given that the formal requirements of a valid 
> pledge have never been defined, it's a bit late to complain about the 
> projects being approved now. You had plenty of time to state on the 
> "Wikinews/Start a new edition" page or its discussion page if you 
> thought that a certain amount of editing on the French Wikipedia was 
> needed to make a valid pledge for a French Wikinews, for instance.
> 
> Personally, I think that we should assume good faith, make sure that the 
> instructions on the page are clear, and count pledges from users who 
> obviously exist. To simplify the counting process, I have only counted 
> users with pages on Meta, but I am sure that there are some more real 
> users who voted for the French Wikinews and who don't have a Meta user 
> page. There are plenty of potential Wikinews contributors who have no 
> interest in contributing to an encyclopedia, a quote collection or a 
> dictionary. I think it would be unfair to discount their pledges.

Admittedly, I thought only regular editors pledge would count. Not 
pledges of editors who have hardly been participated at all, or pledges 
by editors who hardly speak the language. It does not matter if the 
editor has no meta page (though it really would help).
We can make a precision about how 5 editors are "counted" on the talk page.

> But, again, I am perfectly happy to withdraw official recognition from 
> the newly created Wikinews editions until they have reached the required 
> number of participants. If this is what you want, please outline the 
> steps you deem necessary for such a withdrawal of recognition to take place.

We cant really withdraw what already exist. It really would not be kind 
to the few editors who started. I am happier with a project starting 
even with one person, but be considered beta until at least 5 editors 
and the major rules have been defined.

>> My personal opinion Erik. I did not approve wikinews because I felt it 
>> would be biaised and it would divide the community strength. Also, the 
>> majority of french editors did not support it.
> 
> 
> True, but we all agreed that the Wikinews vote was for the project as a 
> whole, not for individual languages. Also remember that many users from 
> individual languages voted on the large English voting page, rather than 
> the translated subpage.

True.
Still, even in counting both pages, wikinews was rejected by the 
majority of french editors. This suggests that wikinews should have only 
been started with strong pledges.

Also, before being official, it would be nice that the main page report 
the real approved goal of the project.
This is not the case on the french Wikipedia right now.

>> This is why some mandatory steps were added to try to limit the risk 
>> of us having a baised project. To ensure enough support would exist 
>> for each individual project.
> 
> No, this is not the history. These steps were actually defined before 
> the vote even took place.

So... Euh... why are they no more valid now ?

>> In setting up a new wikinews without following these rules
> 
> 
> I did follow the rules. You are now interpreting them to say I didn't, 
> but the requirements you say exist (e.g. "> x edits on Wikipedia") were 
> never written down or even discussed. I'm happy to discuss how to 
> proceed further, and am willing to work with you and the rest of the 
> Board in assuring that the creation of the new Wikinews editions will be 
> smooth and will not disrupt existing projects. Please describe what you 
> think should be done next.

The requirements of 5 editors existed. I did not even begin to imagine 
an editor with for example less 50 edits, all being categories addition 
would be considered in this case a pledged editor...
This was my mistake.

My other mistake is to have imagined that a project would only been 
considered fully official, only after a little bit of setting up. If 
only putting the real goal on the main page.
I obviously understand wrongly this was not a requirement.

I am glad a beta logo has now been put on the site.
I will try to find time now so as to ensure the proper goal is defined 
in french, as well as basic rules set up.

For now, the rules are by default the same ones than on wikipedia, so I 
do not see the interest of both being separated. But I already see 
suggestions that current news be removed from fr.

> Regards,
> 
> Erik

I thank you for answering me and acknowledging my concerns.

I think... it is particularly difficult for me to see that the french 
wikinews was created while the majority of french editors did not 
support it, even though most probably still think it is too early, even 
though the 5 editors requirement is not here. What I fear is in 
particular that wikinews will be known as early as next week by french 
journalists, who will discover a totally new and empty wiki. I do not 
think this will be good image. And given the number of editors willing 
to work on it, I know that contrarywise to then english or deutsch 
wikinews, it will grow slowly. I would not be so disappointed if say 25 
people had expressed their desire to go for it, as I know we would soon 
see something.

The situation is quite different from other new projects which raise 
less interest amongst journalists, or for wikipedia when it started 
(since it raised no interest at all from french journalists).

So, I really think it is too early, and when I point out to this, I find 
it real tough to be answered that all my beliefs about the approval 
steps and the 5 editors requirement, are not correct. It makes me feel 
like I never tried to discuss this proposal and never understood it.

So, I get upset upon my comments not being acknowledged. Angela, allow 
me please to offer you my apologies for my rudeness on irc.