Welcome to Wikinews
Getting started as a contributor
Welcome! Thank you for joining Wikinews; we'd love for you to stick around and get more involved. To help you get started we have an essay that will guide you through the process of writing your first full article. There are many other things you can do on the project, but its lifeblood is new, current, stories written neutrally.
All Wikimedia projects have rules. Here are ours.
Listed here are the official policies of the project, you may be referred to some of them if your early attempts at writing articles don't follow them. Don't let this discourage you, we all had to start somewhere.
The rules and guides laid out here are intended to keep content to high standards and meet certain rules the Wikimedia Foundation applies to all projects. It may seem like a lot to read, but you do not have to go through it all in one sitting, or know them all before you can start contributing.
Remember, you should enjoy contributing to the project. If you're really stuck come chat with the regulars. There's usually someone in chat who will be happy to help, but they may not respond instantly.
The core policies
Places to go, people to meet
Wiki projects work because a sense of community forms around the project. Although writing news is far more individualistic than contributing to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, people often need minor help with things like spelling and copyediting. If a story isn't too old you might be able to expand it, or if it is disputed you may be able to find some more sources and rescue it before it is listed for deletion.
There are always discussions going on about how the site could be improved, and your input is of value. Check the links here to see where you can give input to the running of the Wikinews project.
Find help and get involved
Write your first article for Wikinews!
Use the following box to help you create your first article. Simply type in a title to your story and press "Create page". Then start typing text to your story into the new box that will come up. When you're done, press "save page". That's all there is to it!
Brian McNeil / talk 12:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- I don't give a damn if you're intimately related to those IP addresses or not. Don't use that message. It's borderline rude to someone who prefers not to open an account. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:59, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
See, actually Wikinews doesn't publish articles older than 2-3 days. You article was created on 26 october and its sources are of 23 and today it is 29. You have been given a lot of time to find sources, edit it, etc. Now it has to be deleted.10:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
A significant problem turned up during review, but with prompt action it may be possible to improve the article in time to review and publish before it becomes stale. See the article talk page. --Pi zero (talk) 21:17, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
The problem with Portals on WikinewsEdit
I see Pi zero has rolled back your edits to Portal:Germany. Two reasons: We don't edit articles into portals, everything runs off Dynamic Page Lists (DPL) which should only list published articles in places like portals; second, until we've a "robust" output for a topic, region or country, portals are something that was imported from Wikipedia at the inception of Wikinews without understanding the problems of keeping them current.
Talking hypothetically, if we'd a dozen people working on Portal:Germany to contribute and review a at least a dozen articles per week, the portal would be well-worth having. Somewhere-or-other I've put together a swathe of templates that would make it look like a Germany-specific version of the main page too, which is just like you'd get on a mainstream news site (where they can afford to have those dozen contributors).
I also know Pi zero is finishing up a review on the article in question, and the problem is non-English sources. I'm struggling to find a nice way to put it, but if I say: "The vast majority of US and UK citizens are monolingual", and: "The subtleties of a foreign-language news report cannot be pulled out with machine translations to a quality that permits confident reviewing" I would hope you'll get the thrust of the problem. We probably need an essay on non-English sources and reviewing, and some good examples of contributors helping clarify what parts of an article draw from non-English sources, and explaining the most-appropriate synonyms where a machine translation would let the reviewer down. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:06, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- A joke I heard once, here in the US, ran like this:
- Q: What do you call someone who speaks many languages?
- A: A polyglot.
- Q: What do you call someone who speaks only one language?
- A: An American.
- --Pi zero (talk) 20:15, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- This is a problem we're painfully aware of; and, it's why most portals are redirects to the category. As I said above, there's a "critical mass" thang for portals being useful.
- We don't want to discourage you, just to set expectations appropriately and clue you in on what some detractors call the "un-wiki approach" of independent peer review. de.wikinews has as-yet not adopted it, or we'd be able to take the machine translation from there and work on verifying there were no mistranslations in using it as a source. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This is a difficult article, presenting a number of challenges, and we don't seem to have been communicating very successfully on what the difficulties are. I really am trying to be supportive, but I'm struggling with how to do that, as I'm not really sure what, if anything, I should be saying that I haven't been saying. Worse, I have no idea whether the article can be saved, which makes me worry that the help I'm struggling to provide is only going to create more disappointment if the article doesn't work out.
- I'm hoping to take a shot at this this morning (it's 10am local where I am). Obviously there can be no promises, on a volunteer project, but I'm really hoping. --Pi zero (talk) 14:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
- I'm starting to look at it.
- The first thing I've noticed is, looking at your remarks on the talk page section #Original reporting, you say that some of the background information is the result of your own research. If you mean, by this, that some of the background information in the article is not from the cited sources, then your original reporting notes need to explain just which background information that is, and just where you did get it from. This is part of what original reporting notes are for: Every fact in the article needs to be verified and documented; if it doesn't come from one of the cited synthesis sources, then the original reporting notes need to do the verifying and documenting. --Pi zero (talk) 20:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with the article and re-submitting it for review. I added several lede style questions on its talk page; if you're familiar with the sources already, addressing them might be trivial and may help toward the success of the next review. --Gryllida 12:51, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In present form, the article is not-ready for publication. The short-short version: we need detailed reporter's notes. I've gone into much greater detail on that, and mentioned a couple of other problems to be addressed, in the review comments. --Pi zero (talk) 19:01, 12 January 2013 (UTC)