3 ms·
In my experience, contributing to Wikinews was a daily grind compared to Wikipedia. Wikipedia was a chance to craft something long lasting over a period of tim
by femto 9y ago
In my experience, contributing to Wikinews was a daily grind compared to Wikipedia.
Wikipedia was a chance to craft something long lasting over a period of time. Wikinews involved a similar amount of effort per article but invariably the item was largely irrelevant a day or two after it was written. It was hard to keep the news current.
Out of curiosity, do you know if the group has any specific ideas in this regard and what they are?
- davidgerard 9y agoBasically the perception was that Wikinews was bogged down in process. So we came up with a simple obvious process on the spot. Then I looked up the Wikinews process ... and it was about the same. So clearly that wasn't the problem. The difference with WikiTribune is that there are paid journalists. This will I think help.
- femto 9y agoThanks for the reply. Paid journalists make sense, in that they can probably produce words faster than an amateur. I hope it's a success.
- davidgerard 9y agoalso, a lot of the discouraging factor at Wikinews was that the editors were slow to review stuff, and WikiTribune has paid editors as well.