On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Tilman Bayer <tba...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:42 PM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> hi jimmy,
>> i asked on the facebook group wikipeda weekly if joe/ed could publish
>> an upcoming blog post on wikinews. joe sutherland mentioned ".. I
>> simply cannot get my head around its attitude to news coverage". which
>> i find frightening. an editor for 10 years, tens of thousands
>> contributions, thousands of pages created, degree in journalism,
>> dissertation about news on wikipedia, administrator.[1]
>> jimmy, as wikinews refers an old mail of you from 2003 as the holy
>> grail of NPOV, could you please clarify once and for all that your
>> NPOV statemant you sent to wikien-l was valid for wikipedia. and not
>> for wikisource, wikiquote, wikinews. best on the wikinews talk page
>> concerning NPOV [2][4]. i understand of course that certain publishing
>> standards might apply - but NPOV, and "sourced" in the sense of
>> published somewhere else cannot be amongst them [3].
>> just as a note, i hate that the blog [5] opens 20 times slower than
>> wikinews on my mobile phone,
> The blog is hosted by Automattic (known for Wordpress.com) in the same
> environment as high traffic sites like time.com or fivethirtyeight.com.
> You can file technical issues on Phabricator:
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/328/ or contact the blog
> team (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Blog/Guidelines ).
> that it is not in different languages,
> It does support multilingual posts, e.g.
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/18/wikimedia-server-switch/ is available
> in 23 languages.

asaf and others were so kind to point me to the statistics of
wikinews, only SIX persons contributing. this a nice private wiki now
- nobody would notice if it is set read only :)

still i think it benefits the movements software if you as WMF
communications team eat our own dogfood and publish on mediawiki.
wikinews might fit nicely as its target of publishing original texts
is closest - but anyway wiknews would need a policy change and the
bureaucrat(s) changed to allow such kinds of texts. if this policy
change revives its contributor base good. if not i'd agree with asaf
and others to just let it formally die, as it is already de facto

>> that i do not have the "usual mediawiki features". i hate that
>> signpost [7] cannot be read on mobiles because of formatting. i hate
>> the glam newsletter [6] for the same reason, despite beeig again on a
>> different wiki, no "read in different languages". which is the main
>> reason i write this mail ... and asked joe why not using wikinews. and
>> i hate that wikinews does not use mediawiki features to properly
>> classify what quality an article has, e.g. "blog", "npov", etc.
>> [1]
>> https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Foxj&project=en.wikipedia.org
>> [2]
>> https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_talk:Neutral_point_of_view#raphael_honigstein_and_outreach_blog_on_wikinews.3F
>> [3] https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Pillars_of_Wikinews_writing
>> [4]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008096.html
>> [5] blog:
>> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/04/22/ted-wikimedia-collaboration/
>> [6] glam newletter: https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter
>> [7] signpost: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to