Right. Switching back to an actual wiki model (hello nupedia ;) would likely bring back many, many more editors as well.
S On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Tom Morris <t...@tommorris.org> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 05:53, Shii <s...@shii.org> wrote: >> Five hours later (hmm, 9AM EST...), a reviewer finally looked at my >> article and failed me on one count: THE FACT THAT THE EVENT TOOK PLACE >> IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY. No joke. He informed me that because the people >> at the press conference were not speaking English, and the reporting >> on the article was not in English, it was likely the article would not >> pass anyone's review. I asked for clarification on this astounding >> statement, requested another review for the article, and waited. >> >> And waited. >> >> And waited. >> >> And waited. >> > > Wikinews doesn't have a systematic bias against non-Western topics. > > Wikinews has a systematic bias towards bureaucracy. > > I wrote a story about the Israel Philarmonic Orchestra being protested > in London and it took four days to be published. > > The Wikinews review process is slow and broken but it handles > non-Western topics: see http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Category:Chile > > -- > Tom Morris > <http://tommorris.org/> > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Samuel Klein identi.ca:sj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l