On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 09:28 -0500, Jimmy Wales wrote: > Brian, > > Just let me know where I can help. I understand that some in the > wikinews community were dismayed at something I said in an interview > recently about Wikinews having "struggled" for a long time - but I want > to emphasize that I didn't mean to disparage Wikinews... part of the > problem is that people go to Wikipedia to write things that they should > be doing at Wikinews... and one solution is to use the massive traffic > power of Wikipedia to drive traffic to Wikinews. > > I'd also like to have a private discussion (i.e. not on a public list, > because because I wouldn't like to see random ideas I might throw out in > a brainstorming session reported on as "news" about Wikinews in other > press) with leaders (admins + active editors) of Wikinews about "the > future of Wikinews".
I'm sure we could arrange a private list, or schedule an ad-hoc IRC chat. And, I do know that some within the MSM will take the worst possible fragment out of any sentence that they can - it does not seem unreasonable that they might gleefully do so to jab at a potential competitor like Wikinews. The below link is - to me - the best hope we have. It offers a "fresh field" for contributors (re: the Ortega research and chicken-little media reaction), it covers Mike Peel's musing about WMUK issuing a press release mentioning Wikinews as "The paper that's not paper, and won't vanish behind a paywall". I deliberately copied you on this because of a few things Mike Halterman said, I thought the below proposed changes on Wikipedia fitted best with how he characterised your opinions on Wikinews and its promotion. > Lots isn't up to me, but I'm eager to see Wikinews flourish, and would > love to throw around some ideas. From the Wikinews perspective, we kept banging away at getting WP:ITN to more prominently feature our project. That would be a good area to revisit; I know some Wikinewsies would like this a full list of the project's articles, but I appreciate it is on an encyclopedia and playing a longer game of getting people to wrie articles on Wikinews. > Brian McNeil wrote: > > I've decided that now is a *very* appropriate time to, once again, try > > and restart discussion on Wikipedia paying more than lipservice to > > Wikinews as the appropriate venue for news coverage. > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Brian_McNeil#.22Recent.22_templates > > > > These appear to be most of the enWP templates which caution that a > > section of the encyclopedia relates to *news*. You can see the additions > > I've made to highlight Wikinews coverage where it exists, and if not, > > urge people to contribute on Wikinews. > > > > This went down quite badly last time. I'll bite my tongue and just > > describe the reaction to such a link on Ted Kennedy's death as > > "hostile". Realistically, this needs to come as a significant push from > > someone like Jimmy. > > > > Anyway, any thoughts on fine-tuning this? Please note, I've put tooltips > > on all the given links. There are cases where a long Wikinews title > > would mess the template on Wikipedia, so I hide the title in the > > tooltip. -- Brian McNeil <[email protected]> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Brian_McNeil Content of this message in no way represents the opinions or official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its projects.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Wikinews-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
