News is the first rough draft of History, which is probably why wikipedia is
not supposed to be news.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/w
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 2:08 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/6/15 Fayssal F. :
>
>> It's been know since the 2005 London bombings attacks that Wikipedia is good
>> when it comes to evolving stories because the Wikipedia article will always
>> be the most complete and concentrated article about a dev
2009/6/15 Fayssal F. :
> It's been know since the 2005 London bombings attacks that Wikipedia is good
> when it comes to evolving stories because the Wikipedia article will always
> be the most complete and concentrated article about a developing event.
I think our first really famous success in
er to the
2009 Iranian presidential election and Air France Flight 447 exclusively. I
don't know if google are doing it manually but I appreciate the idea.
Fayssal F.
> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:33:53 -0400
> From: Sage Ross
> >
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Google thinks Wikipe
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Sage Ross wrote:
>
> Inclusion of Wikipedia articles in Google News appears to be based on
> a) having been created recently, and b) having as its title a term
> that is part of the core topic of a collection of articles that Google
> News determines to be related.
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Andrew
Turvey wrote:
> Just seen my first Wikinews link from Google news. Uploaded it to:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/24667...@n04/3626171622/
>
Wikinews has been included in Google News listings for a while now,
since shortly after Stable Revisions went into
> To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Sent: Monday, 8 June, 2009 18:42:59 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Google thinks Wikipedia is a news source
>
> On 2009-06-08 17:47:10 +0100, Andrew Turvey
> said:
>
> >
> >
Carcharoth wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> The BBC News website does too. I'm not a great fan of that approach,
>> it makes it hard to find out what the new information is (they don't
>> have "(diff)" links like Wikipedia, so you have to play a game of
>> spot-the-d
2009/6/12 Steve Bennett :
> Though maybe it depends whether new events have occurred, or whether
> new information has simply come to light. You could definitely make a
> case for having a few, big, detailed articles on high profile court
> cases, rather than a string of tidbits.
The Guardian an
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 6:43 PM, geni wrote:
> Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was telling
> traditional media that they should construct their articles in a more
> wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article per
> event rather than creating a string of new
2009/6/11 Carcharoth :
> The other problem is that some news sources
> (can't remember what the BBC do) only give the "latest update" date
> and time.
Yep, the BBC do exactly that. Very annoying indeed!
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/6/7 Fred Bauder :
>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was telling
>>> traditional media that they should construct their articles in a more
>>> wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article pe
Nieman Journalism Lab has some more about what's going on, including
details direct from Google:
http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/06/google-news-experimenting-with-links-to-wikipedia-on-its-homepage/
“Currently, we’re showing a small number of users links to Wikipedia
topic pages that serve as a refe
2009/6/8 Ray Saintonge :
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> 2009/6/8 Joe Anderson :
>>
>>> Could someone speak to Google?
>>>
>>> Surely isn't this entering Wikinews' territory somewhat?
>>>
>> Sure it is, but that's not Google's problem, it's ours. Google will
>> link to wherever the best article on news t
PageRank authority. People-actually-read-it authority. People believe what
they read there authority.
A de facto authority.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 12:51 PM, AGK wrote:
> >
> > I can't imagine why they would add Wikinews as a source - it has
> > no authority, whereas Wikipedia does.
>
>
> What t
>>
>> I can't imagine why they would add Wikinews as a source - it has
>> no authority, whereas Wikipedia does.
>
>
> What type of authority, Brian? Reliability? Based on original reporting?
>
> AGK
Actually, no, based on use of reliable sources.
Fred
__
>
> I can't imagine why they would add Wikinews as a source - it has
> no authority, whereas Wikipedia does.
What type of authority, Brian? Reliability? Based on original reporting?
AGK
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscr
Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/6/8 Joe Anderson :
>
>> Could someone speak to Google?
>>
>> Surely isn't this entering Wikinews' territory somewhat?
>>
> Sure it is, but that's not Google's problem, it's ours. Google will
> link to wherever the best article on news topics are. At the moment,
>
On 2009-06-08 17:47:10 +0100, Andrew Turvey
said:
>
> - "Joe Anderson" wrote:
>> From: "Joe Anderson"
>> To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Sent: Monday, 8 June, 2009 17:18:29 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
>> Subject: Re: [
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Andrew Turvey
wrote:
- "Joe Anderson" wrote:
From: "Joe Anderson"
To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, 8 June, 2009 17:18:29 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Google thinks Wikipedia is a new
2009/6/8 Joe Anderson :
> Could someone speak to Google?
>
> Surely isn't this entering Wikinews' territory somewhat?
Sure it is, but that's not Google's problem, it's ours. Google will
link to wherever the best article on news topics are. At the moment,
that is very often Wikipedia, not Wikinews.
org
> > Sent: Monday, 8 June, 2009 17:18:29 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
> Portugal
> > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Google thinks Wikipedia is a news source
> >
> > On 2009-06-07 08:48:26 +0100, David Gerard said:
> >
> > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/chiro
- "Joe Anderson" wrote:
> From: "Joe Anderson"
> To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Sent: Monday, 8 June, 2009 17:18:29 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Google thinks Wikipedia is a news source
>
> On 2009-06
>
> Surely isn't this entering Wikinews' territory somewhat?
It may be, yes, but I doubt most organisations outside of the Wiki bubble
have heard of Wikinews—Google included—or are at least are aware that it is
a distinct project from Wikipedia. (The similarities between the enwiki Main
Page's "I
On 2009-06-07 08:48:26 +0100, David Gerard said:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/chiropractic/3601011581/
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimed
2009/6/7 David Gerard :
> 2009/6/7 geni :
>
>> Perhaps more directly the recent actions of Google and Microsoft bing
>> suggest that part of being a modern search engine is effectively
>> presenting wikipedia content to people.
>
>
> It was certainly surprising to see Microsoft getting into directl
2009/6/7 geni :
> Perhaps more directly the recent actions of Google and Microsoft bing
> suggest that part of being a modern search engine is effectively
> presenting wikipedia content to people.
It was certainly surprising to see Microsoft getting into directly
providing a Wikipedia mirror.
2009/6/7 AGK :
>>
>> Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was
>> telling traditional media that they should construct their articles in a
>> more wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article
>> per event rather than creating a string of new articles).
>
>
> Unsur
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 2:15 PM, wrote:
> In a message dated 6/7/2009 7:15:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> wiki...@googlemail.com writes:
>
>
>> Unsurprising indeed. I get the impression, from projects such as Knol,
>> that
>> Google is something of an admirer of the Wikipedia model.>>
>> --
In a message dated 6/7/2009 7:15:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
wiki...@googlemail.com writes:
> Unsurprising indeed. I get the impression, from projects such as Knol,
> that
> Google is something of an admirer of the Wikipedia model.>>
> -
Knol however is only collaborative on t
Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/6/7 Fred Bauder :
>
>>> Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was telling
>>> traditional media that they should construct their articles in a more
>>> wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article per
>>> event rather than creating a
2009/6/7 Fred Bauder :
>
>>
>> Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was telling
>> traditional media that they should construct their articles in a more
>> wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article per
>> event rather than creating a string of new articles).
>
>
> Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was
> telling traditional media that they should construct their articles in a
> more wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article
> per event rather than creating a string of new articles).
Unsurprising indeed. I get th
>
> Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was telling
> traditional media that they should construct their articles in a more
> wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article per
> event rather than creating a string of new articles).
>
> --
> geni
>
The New York
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/chiropractic/3601011581/
>
>
> - d.
>
Wikipedia only aggregates news, but as those who read many newspapers,
and watch several channels of TV know, that is what all news sources do;
they develop a few stories independently, but the bulk of their coverage
is aggregate
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:43 AM, geni wrote:
> 2009/6/7 David Gerard :
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/chiropractic/3601011581/
>>
>>
>> - d.
>
> Unfortunate but unsurprising.
Fortunate and surprising, actually. Wikipedia articles actually serve
the purpose of an news source (with the restriction o
2009/6/7 David Gerard :
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/chiropractic/3601011581/
>
>
> - d.
Unfortunate but unsurprising. Not that long ago Google was telling
traditional media that they should construct their articles in a more
wikipedia like manner (ie continuously update a single article per
eve
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chiropractic/3601011581/
- d.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
38 matches
Mail list logo
