Wikinews

Wikinews:Accreditation requests/Archive 1

< Wikinews:Accreditation requests
This is an archive of accreditation requests. Please do not edit them, rather bring your comments up here.
Requests older than these can be found here.

Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is Been bold and approving it. I feel that many of the the !oppose votes are non-votes. And should not count. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Gwyndon

edit
Name: Wolfgang G. Wettach
Location: Tuebingen, Germany
Areas of interest: EU, politics, literature, religion (see user page)
Reason: I'm one of the few accredited users of de.wikinews and saw the @wikinewsies announcement there. I'd like to contribute more in both languages and an accreditation helps to lend credibility both to my presence as a journalist and to the news I write or contribute to. (Read: Real people make real news)
Accomplishments: I'm registered at Wikinews for over two years. There's one article I did back then (Taizé ecumenical community founder Frère Roger assassinated) and ...more to come. My freshly updated user page reflects my willingness to contribute more here. In de-Wikinews I have more contributions, original reporting and was accredited there. Name, adress and picture are already given on my user page here.
Contact information: AIM: Gwyndon, Skype: PeliCorn, Phone Voicebox: (US) 1-267-316-7537, (DE) 01212-510383782, Special:Emailuser. A wikinewsies email on the page would be welcome.
User ID: 3900
Applied on: 16:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Questions

edit
  • Can you provide links to the accreditation process on de.? I was unaware of it and Sean Heron did not go through it to my knowledge.
http://de.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Akkreditierung#Akkreditierte_Benutzer - See also Angela's comments below. --Gwyndon 13:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See comments of Angela and Sonic. Angela wrote about my request at the German WaterCooler, where I also reacted, but the de. section isn't as active as en. --Gwyndon 13:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
  • Sure. Cary Bass 20:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: If you are a valued contributer on one Wikinews, I think that accreditation should apply to some levels on all Wikinews'. Support very much. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 09:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on the basis that we should really assess an accreditation request on the work done on this wiki. I don't understand German so can't judge this users contributions on de wikinews nor can I judge the weight with which I should consider accreditation there. I don't see a good justification for accreditation either, doesn't need accreditation to demonstrate good article writing on en wikinews. This seems to stem from the wikinewsies website and I feel very strongly that since it is not associated offically with WMF then the enwikinews accreditation process shouldn't be distracted by these requests with the aim of getting an email address. Adambro 12:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This user is already accredited on the de.wikinews. They would not give it to him if it were not justified. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 12:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - As you should note from my oppose, I am well aware this user has accreditation on de wikinews. The point is I don't understand German so can't determine for myself how much value accreditation on de wikinews should hold in my considerations. Regardless of the accreditation elsewhere, this user has yet to demonstrate their ability to write articles in English beyond the one which should I suggest be of critical importance in this AR. I appreciate accreditation has its benefits but I have no doubt that it is possible to write a good article without it and would like to see a few examples of this. I can't accept that just because this user is accredited elsewhere they should be given accreditation here and I think there needs to be some clarification as to why they seek it. If a wikinewsies email address is the objective then this request should be considered with little merit and those responsible for that website should not encourage users of other language versions of wikinews to use the AR on enwikinews as a pathway to an email address. Adambro 14:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per reasons above. --David Shankbone 13:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: First of all I think it should be made clear that the German wikinews' "accreditation process" (historical) used to be somewhat different from the English one. It was kind of a predecessor of original reporting which was introduced to the German wikinews only last year in October. Before that, people who put their names and addresses on their user pages and had (enough) supporters from the German wikinews on the corresponding accreditation page could write news articles without giving explicit sources for them.
As far as User:Gwyndon is concerned, he got three votes for the accreditation (from three users not very active anymore, but much more active at that time) and nobody opposed or explicitly obstained from voting (August 2005). Actually, I do not really know why not so many people voted in his case. (I started my (real) contributions to the German wikinews about a month later.)
As to my personal opinion: He has not contributed a lot to the German wikinews (if I am not wrong, he has started only three articles up to now in the German wikinews), but I don't remember any issues concerning NPOV which would let me vote against his accreditation. --Angela H. 19:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another comment: Sean Heron was basically the one who introduced original reporting to the German wikinews, and following that the accreditation procedure was stopped. That's why Sean is not accredited in the German wikinews. --Angela H. 19:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Angela, thanks for the input. You may be aware there are discussions and a proposal to form a Wikinews Foundation (tentative name). There's a discussion and proposal over on Meta. All accredited reporters should read and sign up to work on the proposal (hint, hint) and I'd like to see input from other language versions of the project - this will impact them.
As to voting on this one, I'm Neutral, it doesn't sound like there is a robust accreditation process on de.wikinews and that devalues the claim. I have already said I will liaise with other languages for @wikinewsie.org addresses if they have a decent accreditation process. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. User has less than 50 edits on de.wikinews and already has accreditation there, don't think an English accreditation will help him much. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 09:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Next comments: If you are looking here for someone "representing" the German wikinews section, there are certainly more active contributors (both in their article contributions and overall more continuous contributions and "influence" on the project) whom I would prefer seeing in a "Wikinews Foundation" (one may read off some of them from the Wikinews statistics — if they agreed). In this case this should be made more public in the other projects. If I remember correctly, this has never been discussed on de.wikinews. Also, if there is someone needed from de.wikinews to support User:Gwyndon, this accreditation request should probably be made public there. (There has not been a single entry concerning it on de.wikinews.) But I could go and leave a note on de:Wikinews:Pressestammtisch. --Angela H. 11:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I have now pointed out the accreditation process on de:Wikinews:Pressestammtisch, as it is likely that more contributors will read it there and the German "accreditation" is also mentioned in Gwyndon's introductory statement. --Angela H. 12:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There is not much to add to Angela's statement. While the accreditation in this wiki aims to help users to get access to events which they want to write about, the german accreditation (does no longer exist) was an essential condition to do original reporting. This policy was to strict and inconsistent. That is why it was abandoned, after community consensus had been reached. Now we have the same OR-policy as in this wiki. We do not have proceedings similar to the accreditation on en.wikinews. If users want to get access to an event or to do interviews, we say they schould do this as freelance journalists writing for wikinews.org. You will get access to many events (e.g. press conferences) this way. This accreditation seems to give alternative press passes to users. They have no legal status. However, they might help. I hope that I have made it more obvious now. I'm neutral towards Gwyndon. He has not made many edits on de.wn, but has written an article, which contained original reporting. I would give him a chance. --SonicR 13:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
* Answer There is not much to add to SonicR's statement. While I do not have a ton of edits to my credit, the few things I did were sound, and as stated my request is partly to show my commitment to contribute seriously. If do not keep up to any expectations you might have, my accreditation will expire automatically, as I understand it. So why not give it a chance? As for my ability to write in english language, you're free to check my LJ, which mostly is in english and has entries over the last three years, including scattered original reporting and/or comments on the future of Europe from meetings I had with people from economic science and politics when they came to Tuebingen to give talks on the matter. Journalistic writing and reporting is a more serious matter than LJ statements, but I'm willing to go the whole nine yards to write for WikiNews. --Gwyndon 21:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is approved. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

David Shankbone

edit
Name: David Miller
Location: New York City
Areas of interest: Interviews; Even coverage; Photography - New York City
Reason: For the last year I have photographed for Wikipedia, with a notable focus on people (there are galleries on my Newsie page). In addition to doing coverage of events, I want to start a new project on Wikinews of conducting interviews. I currently have lined up w:Vivien Goldman, w:Jim McGreevey and w:Evan Wolfson. I am scheduled to shoot w:Bob Shrum and w:Edmund White. I only want to pursue this project with accreditation.
Accomplishments: Tompkins Square Park Police Riot, Floyd Abrams, Reality film, and Evan Wolfson.
Contact information: davidshankbone@gmail.com (not sure what else to put here)
User ID: 13059
Applied on: 10:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Administrivia

edit

Questions

edit
  • There are a couple of reasons: 1. Because I want the validation that goes with the accreditation. Since I am giving my time and using my contacts for free that I think it is a reasonable request; and 2. Because I don't know everyone and it makes it less work for me to be able to use press credentials. --David Shankbone 19:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)\[reply]
  • I should clarify: When I say I "want the validation" I didn't mean personal validation, but validation in the eyes of the people I interview. Having worked with notable people, validation means I am officially here for a project, and not out of some hobbyist's desire to meet famous or notable people. I understand I wrote this in a way that makes it sound like I personally just want some kind of validation of myself, or something... --David Shankbone 13:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • And, as a follow-up, why do you say you would only "pursue this project with accreditation"? If you don't succeed with the accreditation request this time, will you still conduct the interviews you have lined-up and contribute the articles to Wikinews? Jcart1534 17:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The breadth, the scope and the quality of my work have all increased. And a track record of proving I can get things done that I set out to do has only grown. I also am interested in making this a Wikinews project; whereas before my work was going to be on the Commons and Wikipedia. --David Shankbone 19:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The issue wasn't that I couldn't get any interviews, the issue was that I wanted to get many interviews. To be able to contact people and say I am an accredited press agent for Wikinews will open those doors. It also gives me a new angle to approach people I have previous photographed ("Hi, it's me again...I've recently been granted press credentials and would like to do an interview to go with your photograph"). Appearances of validity in these things count for more than many may realize. It also gives an excuse as to why I didn't do an interview the first go-round ("I wasn't accredited"). --David Shankbone 21:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure. For about two months I have been working on a book, work that has been postponed by the photography and the ginormous amount of time and focus it has taken away from writing. At times, it has felt thankless, but only at certain moments. Regardless, I am a little bored with it--just a little. It's also been my choice to do it, so I'm not complaining (too much). My ultimate goal in life is to be a writer. I also believe in free culture, and I have loved Wikimedia for that reason. Trying to gauge how to combine these pursuits in a way that interests me has been a challenge. Without accreditation, I can't do Wikinews the way I want to do it (and let's be honest, as the person doing the work, my wishes should account for something). I don't want to proceed with a project with one hand tied behind my back, and that's what lack of accreditation would do. It's not that there is nobody who will talk to me, it's that I want to have more options and choices. I also couldn't join the w:New York Press Club, I couldn't get into many events to cover them, etc. But in reality, it's the ability to approach people and say, "I've interviewed and photographed so-and-so for Wikipedia, and I would like to interview you...": that would be the clincher. I feel the question is, "Does Wikinews want this project?" If the answer is yes, then it's "Do we believe David when he says this is what he needs to do it properly?" That seems to be where the conflict comes in. I say I do, and since I want to do it properly, I most likely would not do it. Sorry. It's not extortion, it's my right to be able to say I want to do the project right, or not at all. And having dealt with many notable people, I know what I need to do it right. You guys either trust me in that, or don't. Wikinews and David Shankbone will all go on productively regardless of the way the accreditation process goes. --David Shankbone 21:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
  • Support, this user is making an effort to make Wikinews a home where he can do work. If you have concerns about his newness then support a temp accreditation. If people don't trust him based on contributions elsewhere we can offer a 1-2 month pass and see if we support an extension with the results at the end of that period. --Brian McNeil / talk 17:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, accreditation for photographers is a bit more complicated, but the fact that David's work has been so useful to Wikipedia combined with the consideration that he intends to work a great deal more with Wikinews certainly should be a factor for others. Cary Bass 17:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, this user is a trustworthy Wikimedian who can grow into a valuable contributor. His images alone could be used in News in pictures on the main page, and we would be expanding our network of accredited photographers. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:23, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Experience and the interviews are fantastic :) Can't wait to read them. TheFearow | userpage | contribs 21:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose (changed from support) - After re-reading the answers, the fact you will cancel the interviews and discontinue work on wikinews appears to be w:Extortion, trying to make people support you or loose a contributor. If you want accreditation, you should show a want to work for Wikinews. You do not need accreditation if you are already organising things with these people. It does appear to show that you want accreditation as a form of trophy or as a showoff point, even though you do not require it. I normally don't oppose, and I may have got your intentions etc wrong. If so, please say. TheFearow | userpage | contribs 01:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe this is a huge assumption of bad faith, and that you should re-read his answers more carefully without that assumption beforehand. I can personally attest with conversations that David is (or at least was) very interested in helping Wikinews, is dedicated to working with the projects and is a great resource and asset to have. Furthermore, if you want more people to contribute to Wikinews, you have to stop treating people who want to help like they want to hurt you. Cary Bass 12:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure if you're addressing TheFearow in your last comment; he's not treating the individual like he wants to hurt the project. He's reacting to a poorly worded response to a legitimate question, and pointing out something important: You don't need accreditation to conduct interviews and such. If he comes right out and says that someone will not conduct an interview unless they can see press credentials, then we're talking about a different issue. irid:t 14:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I wonder why it is seen that I do not need accreditation when I have stated that in order to do this, I do need it? Just because I have a couple of friends who will let me interview them doesn't mean that in order to fully bring the project to fruition I don't need something that is typically given away by news organization. I don't think press accreditation should be seen as anything special by the news organization; it's only seen as a validation to the organizations and people who only want accredited press agents at their events and in their homes. --David Shankbone 14:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To put it simply: we aren't a typical news organization. Just because it's freely given away elsewhere does not mean the same process is followed here. irid:t 14:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, then there should be a reason for it and that reasoning should take into account what exactly Wikinews wants to be and what it can be. There should also be a reason for assuming I don't know what I'm talking about when I say I need accreditation. --David Shankbone 14:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Very Weak Oppose Basically Neutral I Guess But Still Leaning Oppose I'm always pleased to support for more responsibility. Accreditation is, effectively, responsibility for representing Wikinews as a member of the free press. Sadly, I have to agree with what TheFearow said above; what you've essentially said is "play my way or I'm going home". You're a good contributer, and I'm pleased to see that. But that comment was brash and doesn't represent our attitude of "everyone can contribute" very well. irid:t 01:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't actually read "play my way or I'm going home" in David's response, only in what TheFearow had to say. Like I suggested to TheFearow, I believe you should reread his responses without that in mind.
  • Furthermore, what do you expect from people when you treat their requests this way? David is eminently qualified, a huge asset. Cary Bass 12:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't succeed with the accreditation request this time, will you still conduct the interviews you have lined-up and contribute the articles to Wikinews? --Jcart1534
No, ... It's a quid pro quo issue for me. --David Shankbone
I'm only making a (little) issue out of this because if this user is to represent the community, that type of "I'm only going to participate if you give me what I want" comment is either unintentional and brash, or intentional and not appropriate. As I said, "I'm always pleased to support for more responsibility". My vote would effectively be neutral, and I'll change it as such. But I want to point out that TheFearow has a good point; that was effectively a threat, and left a poor impression on me. irid:t 14:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Per above comments. Would like to see some basic contributions on Wikinews. (eg. copyediting, talking with other editors, helping newbies, etc). "I only want to pursue this project with accreditation" sounded a little harsh. I have to agree with TheFearow's comments. Sorry... Neutral David has said he will be spending more of his time on Wikinews. I hope this is true. At the moment I do not feel that I can vote a full support though. I still think he is a good user and I think he will do a good job if he stays with us :) —FellowWiki Newsie 02:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think these opposes take into account the difficulty it is to get notable people to give you your time, and if they see you as just some "hobbyist" the chance of it happening isn't particularly likely. I'm not sure why asking for accreditation to work for Wikinews is seen in the light it is seen in here. Basically, you have someone who has achieved and given quite a bit asking for help to go to the next level, and being admonished for saying that in order to go to the next level he needs another tool. Instead of, "Hey, someone wants to help out and contribute, and he says he needs this and has proven himself a good deal," the mentality is "Look, we aren't going to give you any trophies." This thinking, I don't really understand. --David Shankbone 02:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But what you're basically saying is that Accreditation is a special recognition, which it isn't. Nobody on this wiki is treated specially, and one's standing here is only defined by their work and their interaction. Not what templates they can put on their user page. Accreditation is for organizations asking for credentials.
If you are under the impression that the wiki "owes" you something, I'm sorry, you won't find what you're looking for. We all respect you for the work you've done. I can tell you right now that a list of your accomplishments on your userpage (and by that I mean articles, pictures, interviews, clean ups, projects, whatever you can do that is constructive) has a great deal more impact than simply stating that Wikinews recognizes that you're capable of doing interviews.
Perhaps you don't understand the model. Or perhaps you do. In either case, Accreditation is not a trophy, nor a reward, nor a special tool. It's a laminated piece of paper. irid:t 03:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, I don't understand the attitude. This seems to be more about assuming bad faith about me--that I want a "trophy"--instead of assuming good faith that the press accreditation will help me complete the project. A couple thoughts spring to mind: most serious news organizations don't look at accreditation as a gift, a favor, or a trophy, but as a run-of-the-mill step in granting its reporters and photographers access to places and people to get the job done. Here, it appears to be seen as a status symbol. I don't see it that way. When I approached the Comedy Festival here in New York, they said only accredited press get press passes; when I approached the Highline Festival (David Bowie, et. al.) they said only accredited press get in; when I approached New York Fashion Week, same thing. For every 30 requests I send out asking people if I can meet with them to do their photo, only 10 say yes. I spend about 40 hours a week on Wikipedia and Commons contributing, scheduling times to meet with people, purchasing expensive equipment and software, and coming up with new ideas (such as a series of interviews). I have full-time job, I've been to law school, lived in three countries, six states and 17 cities, and along the way I have met and befriended a handful of notable people I can ask to do interviews, but in order to do the project the way it should be done, I need press accreditation. Instead of granting what most news organizations do not even consider a big deal, the opposing votes take into account irrelevant criteria such as my brashness (which other news organizations take as a positive - reporters aren't typically meek and conciliatory). I have a lot of different things I can work on; here, I thought it would be cool to do a series of interviews and coverage of events that happen in New York City that I have been prevented from accomplishing because I lack accreditation. I approached (a second time) Wikinews and the foundation to see if there is interest in having me do it the way that my experience tells me it needs to be done. Most news organizations would say, "Sure, that sounds great, we'll help you provide us this content." Most news organizations don't look at working for them and having the credentials to do so as a "trophy", and at this point in my life, neither do I. I don't need to do this; I wanted to do this. But I can easily do other things. If it rubs you the wrong way that I say I know what I am talking about, and I know what I need to get it done, then I apologize. But I don't see how Wikinews is going to break barriers when accomplished people approach with projects they would like to do in good faith, and I are instead told they have bad faith motivations for their requests. I don't need to do this; it sounded interesting and fun. Right now, it is not feeling so fun, and I take exception to people ascribing to me motivations I do not possess. There are other Internet news services, student papers, etc. that gladly issue press credentials to people with proven track records. Getting press accreditation isn't tricky in other venues. The difference is that I wanted to do this for the foundation, not for-profit companies. Instead, I'm told my brashness--a hallmark of a good reporter, interviewer, and photographer--is a negative and no trophies will be supplied here. It's difficult to comprehend. --David Shankbone 11:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the oppose votes here are unfair. David has a track record on other Wikis, and is looking to join our team. He's treating this as seriously as a job interview, and the oppose votes seems to be saying "prove yourself". David has journalists in the family and has given every indication he will do high-quality work. I would therefore respectfully request that the oppose votes be stricken or changed to "support temp accred" to allow David time to prove himself. I appreciate there is a degree of caution in handing out credentials but this is a case where - if asked - I could likely get Jimbo to come along and vote support. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I will only say that "it's a quid pro quo issue for me" doesn't sound like "I need tools to get this job done". irid:t 14:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Irid, with all due respect, you are making this about me, and not about the project. I'm not some random guy who has come in off the street. You clearly care about the Wikinews project, and I am saying, "I can get X done but I need X to do it right." If you agree that my prior work shows I have the ability to get something like this done, and that I apparently have the contacts to bring it about, then why would you question me and my motivations when I state I need accreditation to do it? If you think this is a bonus for Wikinews to have me do this, then why would you want to prevent me from doing it just because you don't like the phrasing of an answer? I think the questions you should ask are, "Can we use this guy and can he do what he says he is going to do if we give him the accreditation?" Not, "Can he get this done with as minimal assistance from Wikinews as possible?" Right now, that's how I see the issue for you: let's let the guy work for free with as minimal assistance as possible because I do not like the way he has responded to a question. Why are we here and why do we have an accreditation process if it is not to help people contribute, and to believe good-faith and accomplished editors when they say they need something to do it? Why even question them and their motivations when they make those assertions? It's not very good faith, when I think I've earned the good faith. --David Shankbone 14:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to earn good faith, everyone deserves it by default. That said, yes, you absolutely have been a great contributer. It has not been until now that you've even recognized my point that you responded to that question poorly, and here's where we're getting somewhere. My neutral vote was a result of a few things, the most outward of which was your tone in responding to questions. You do realize that you wrote "Because I want the validation that goes with the accreditation", right? That contradicts what you've said in replying to me.
I'm not trying to ensure your accreditation fails. I'm simply having a discussion, and explaining my vote. I want to ensure that anyone representing Wikinews in the field is representing it well; that doesn't mean you shouldn't be accredited, that means you should be careful with your words. irid:t 14:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But you are voting and then discussing. I clarified my inartful wording. I don't think my representation in the field should be seen as questionable, since many of the people I have photographed have gone on to become friends. --David Shankbone 15:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not questioning your reputation. I'm saying that you're a representative of the community. Words have a very big impact on your image, and once you're accredited (which I'm sure you will be) they have an impact on our image. When you have a piece of paper that says, "I speak for Wikinews as an organization and as a member of the press", anything you say reflects directly on us. irid:t 15:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, and I also understand you have Wikinews's best interests at heart, which is why I think you should vote to support. I apologize for rushed wording that I did when I was at work trying to get documents to a consulate, but they did not have behind them the intention you gleaned. I feel I proposed this project in good faith, and I thought it would be more warmly received, and that Wikinews would be glad to lend assistance to a long-standing Wikimedia participant. Just as you perhaps gleaned the wrong message from my words, I have so far gleaned the message, "You work for free, and you will get minimal assistance from us because we don't like your attitude. Good luck." It's a little disconcerting to come excited to do something, and kind of receive a kick in the pants just because I asked for some bare-bones assistance in the form of a press pass. Like I said, I might be misreading your comments and other wrong, but the only thing I get out of this is a personal sense of satisfaction (like the rest of us). Right now, it doesn't feel so satisfying. --David Shankbone 15:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Clearly this is the kind of individual who contributes a unique and important component to our Wikinews reporting. The above debates seem quite bizarre to me, as the benefits of accrediting David seem obvious.Bubbaprog 13:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -Meekel 16:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. irid:t 22:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I hardly ever vote on these things and i'm not going to change my ways soon. However one of the key parts of WN and the accreditation policy is NPOV. As you seem to have no work published here (all accomplishments are on WP) how do expect us to guess at your NPOV quality and the quality of any articles/interviews. I know that the policy states must be a member of a wikimedia project but everyone recognises this to be a "different" project. On the other hand you have a lot of good pics and are obviously dedicated to Wikimedia. Please DO NOT interperate this as criticism or support these are mearly my thoughts. --MarkTalk to me 22:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a fair question. I've written four biographies on Wikipedia, w:Evan Wolfson, w:Floyd Abrams, w:Mark Barnes and w:Larry Kramer. I am a fan of all four, but in each I made it clear to them I would include criticism, if any could be found. In the case of Barnes, it was difficult. If opinion is presented, it is only sourced opinion from a notable person. That's for Wikipedia. I also wrote the article on the w:Tompkins Square Park Police Riot (which became somewhat mangled during its FA review). There's an example of a current event I wrote. On a topic, I wrote w:Reality film just recently, and it was actually a controversial topic (bizarrely - perhaps b/c it was linked to a 'feud' I've had with another editor on Wikipedia). You can see my NPOV on articles like w:Talk:Al Franken. I like Al Franken, but there you will find I insisted we include his drug use because we can't whitewash the article. I went to Wikipedia at a time when I felt I couldn't find reliable sources of reality in the corporate media. Whether Wikipedia has successfully become that is debatable, but it's an attempt. It's why I've spent thousands of dollars and hours trying to prop it up as best I can. I don't want my POV, nor anyone else's. Let me see the facts, and I will decide myself how to interpret them. I think facts speak for themselves, and I don't want spin on them, not my own or yours. Does that answer the question? --David Shankbone 22:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Sorry if a couple of questions caused this furor, David! But I feel requests for accreditation and/or admin ought to be put under some scrutiny and not just rubber-stamped. I feel we've gotten to understand a bit more where you are coming from and I think Wikinews will benefit from your input. I hope this accreditation request is successful for you. I look forward to some of those interviews. Cheers, Jcart1534 23:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It was a misunderstanding, me reading your answers wrong. It should be great having you accredited! TheFearow | userpage | contribs 23:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Has done lots of great work on other projects and it seems like he will be an asset to Wikinews --Cspurrier 00:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is approved. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

BrockF5

edit
Name: Rico C. C. Shen
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Areas of interest: Exposition (Exhibition), Sports, Life
Reason: There has many activities, expos, sports events in Taipei. But lots of common people can't enter in some of activities, such as Computex, Semicon, TAITRONICS, ..., etc. I'm active at Chinese Wikinews for a long time, but I know this project in English lately in July. After registering here, I translated and brought some of important information from Chinese to English not only text but also pictures (please see My Gallery Info at Commons), such as Wikimania 2007, 2007 World Deaf Swimming Championships, 2007 Taiwan Sports Elite Awards (recently). And also, I have linked with "TAITRA" and "SEMI Global" for the future of international exhibition information, and linked with "Sports Affairs Council of Executive Yuan, Taiwan" for Sports in Taiwan to promote Wikinews Project because lots of commercial organization or companies didn't know about Wikimedia and Wikinews, with the promotion at some activities, Wikinews in Chinese and English will be stronger and have a great improvement. That's the wikipedians and wikinewsies have to do.
Accomplishments: Please refer to my Userpage, Chinese Version can be found Here.
Contact information: E-Mail: brockf5ethome.com.tw / MSN: AkiraTauehotmail.com / Skype: blueakiyama / Cellular Phone: Upon request.
User ID: 15477
Applied on: 05:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Votes:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is approved. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Meekel (approved)

edit
Name: Michael Valentine
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Areas of interest: Technology, aviation, breaking news, local current affairs, photojournalism
Reason: There are many local events in Edinburgh such as the Edinburgh Film Festival, Edinburgh Interactive Festival & the Fringe that would require such accreditation to allow me access to gain information for original reporting. I feel there aren't many stories relating to Scotland and feel I could improve this in a big way. I have easy access around the city of Edinburgh to reach breaking stories for reporting and for photography and feel that accreditation would allow me to get as close to a story as possible. Feel free to ask any questions.
Accomplishments: My user page will show articles that I have started while other minor & major edits to articles can be found here
Contact information: E-Mail & MSN: meekel [at] blueyonder.co.uk | AIM & Skype: meekeluk | Phone number available on request
User ID: 15190
Applied on: 20:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Questions

edit
  1. Are you active on other wiki's as well? --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment, no. My main interest has always been to do with news, media and how everything is reported. However I'm sure, with time, I will become not only more active on WN but also other wiki's. —Meekel 08:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is decline. It's been over seven days and there has not yet been a single support vote. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

taltal13

edit
Name: Tal Eisenberg
Location: New York, NY
Areas of interest: Sporting Events, Breaking News, Photography
Reason: covering MLB playoffs, Current NFL Season, Upcoming NBA & NHL Seasons + Special events such upcoming Jermain Taylor boxing, horse racing such as the Kentucky Derby, Preakness & Belmont Stakes, U.S. Open Tennis & Golf, plus many more
Accomplishments: I've started two articles myself on WikiNews and contributed to one other. I know it isn't much yet, but very much looking forward to covering and photographing professional and collegiate sports in America and abroad
Contact information: tal.eisenberg@gmail.com 917-825-2086
User ID: 16694
Applied on: 04:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Votes:

Comment:Totally understand the opposition based on experience and time, however for photojournalism in the sports world it is virtually impossible to photograph professionally without credentials. Photographing sports has always been a hobby and would love to make it a profession full time. 05:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Comment Commons hasn't found a route yet to photo-journalism. I don't know why they would want to do that with no words. A picture is worth a thousands words, uh- huh? -Edbrown05 06:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Words are worth a thousand pictures. -Edbrown05 06:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wouldn't just be taking the pictures I would be reporting as well, thought my passion is the pictures.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is approved. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Iamsam227 (approved)

edit
Name: Sam Thomas
Location: Northport, New York
Areas of interest: Government, International Politics, Sports, Science
Reason: The author Ishmael Beah is coming to my school in early November to give a speech, and I have already talked to a supervisor who said they would try to arrange an interview for me with Mr. Beah. It would be a great help if I could become an accredited reporter to finalize this interview. I would, of course, plan on doing further interviews in the future. I have the ability to interview certain basketball players and coaches because of my position as a staff writer for Longislandbasketball.com.
Accomplishments:

http://longislandbasketball.com/LongIslandAllStarGame2007.html

http://longislandbasketball.com/AskTheCoach.html

Contact information: iamsam227@gmail.com
User ID: 17160
Applied on: 17:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Votes:

Closed with full support. Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 02:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is decline - no support votes. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Auroranorth

edit
Name: Brandon Zubek
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Areas of interest: Sports and politics
Reason: I would like to cover the late-November Australian federal election. We're lacking a lot of info on this and I'd like to get into the press events for first-hand reporting.
Accomplishments: Portal:Australia/Election 2007, Ben Cousins sacked by West Coast in AFL drug scandal. A-League 2007-08: Round 6 Results, A-League 2007-08: Round 7 Results. I have contributed to other Wikimedia projects (like Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia) for over a year. According to policy, this is sufficient qualification of time (I understand the projects, etc.)
Contact information: Email
User ID: 17338
Applied on: 08:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Questions:

edit
Yes. Take a look at Speers Point, New South Wales, which has been one of my greatest achievements in recent times. I have worked in conjunction with another local user on Public Schools Association articles. Auroranorth 23:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some of them, yes. Some of them, no. I can see mistakes when pointed out to me and I can admit that I made them and learn from them. Auroranorth 23:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • What would I need to do to gain trust? (from Auroranorth to other Wikinewsies)
Unfortunately, that takes time and good productive edits. Why don't you write a few articles for us? Good, interesting ones. --David Shankbone 23:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To follow up on David's comment, most people here are not heavily active on Wikipedia, the projects require a different mindset and, well, when you get in the right frame of mind to do Wikinews - with challenging yourself on deadlines and the like - you either find it a chore, or you're happy as a pig in shit pushing yourself to see what you can do. We don't want people to ask for accreditation before they've tried a little work on-wiki, and got feedback. I've seen one accreditation withdrawn, and I'm not happy to see the situation we have at the moment with many having the credentials but no longer editing. --Brian McNeil / talk 19:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I'll write good quality articles. Auroranorth 07:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Votes:

edit
Support:
edit
Oppose:
edit
  • Oppose Suspicious edits like this. Changed coding in quiz from |type="()"} to |type-"()"} which enabled the quiz to make it multiple choice. Also, this user has only been on Wikinews for one month and has not made many edits. He/she said they have been using Commons for over one year. Not really the case if you look at the contributions. Too new. Has a history of blocks on Wikipedia. He/she was just blocked on Wikipedia yesterday for one week. [1] —FellowWiki Newsie 16:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Yes, but the 'suspicious edit' was a mistake on my part, I didn't mean to do that. Auroranorth 23:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - By all means try to expand our coverage of the Australian elections but I'm afraid I can't support accreditation at this time. Too new, not enough contributions to allow me to judge. Looking at your contributions on other WMF projects; Wikimedia Commons, low number of edits, Wikipedia, where you have 3,482 edits, there are a number of blocks. Adambro 16:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Don't like the blocks on Wikipedia, makes me reluctant to trust this user.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - You are welcome to contribute, but accreditation? Not until you have built up some kind of responsible edit history; here would be preferable, but Wikipedia itself would be a good start. --David Shankbone 23:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Already done. I have about 3500 edits there, however it is true I have been blocked (for a week) for using vandal warnings a bit erratically. My block log is 'long' because I keep being unblocked to reduce the timing. Auroranorth 23:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your block log is long as it is without the unblocks. Also, I see you were blocked for six months a while back. —FellowWiki Newsie 00:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Don't take this the wrong way, but if this is the first time I've seen your name, then you havn't contributed enough. Contribute a bit more, then try again, and It may be a support vote from me next time. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
edit
  • Neutral Blocks on Wikipedia are a concern, particularly to be receiving them after 3,500 or so edits. Write more articles here and engage with the community. It is smaller than on Wikipedia and people like to believe they know you well enough to trust you. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, that hits the nail on the head. Do you think I could achieve accreditation levels by the November 24 Australian election? Auroranorth 10:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We speedied Sean Heron for the G8, you just need to win over a few people who will speak up for you and understand that we're not Wikipedia. Like I say, engage with the community and see where it goes. If you want to cover the election you'll need to do background prior to it really kicking off, so if you can find stuff about that to do articles on then you learn what you'd need to be aware of for the coverage and prove yourself at the same time. I would not be opposed to applying WP:SNOW to an accreditation request to get you credentials in a short timeframe. However, that relies on a lot more people than me. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So you're saying that I need to win over people? How could I do that? Auroranorth 11:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did you misread SNOW? It is usually applied when things are being voted against, but I don't see why the same principle can't be applied going the other way. Anyway, yes - a few (don't go crazy) articles will help people build confidence and trust in them. Contributions here will almost always be given more weight than those elsewhere. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding SNOW, are you saying that you would oppose speedying any accreditation credentials for the election? Auroranorth 11:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The opposite. I'm saying we should be able to apply SNOW to speedy grant credentials - even if only temporary. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, OK. Maybe I should submit a second request a week before the election. I am working hard on articles presently. What do you think? Auroranorth 11:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, do you think the others would agree to that (question posed to everybody)? What do I do to this application? I don't wish to close it yet. I want to make sure everybody has a good look at this conversation, if you don't mind! Auroranorth 12:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed - no supprt votes so declined this time--MarkTalk to me 23:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is successfull. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

odder

edit

THIS AR REQUEST IS CLOSED SUCCESSFUL - ISSUING EMAIL ADDRESS AND PUTTING ON WN:CV

Name: Tomasz W. Kozłowski
Location: Zielona Góra, Poland (google maps)
Areas of interest: basketball (mainly Wiecko Zielona Góra), speedway (ZKŻ Zielona Góra), breaking news
Reason: I am asking for the accreditation mainly because the Polish chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation – Wikimedia Polska Association – cannot guarantee I'd be let in to the press-only parts of the events I'd like to write about. I'd like to use the accreditation for the 3rd Festival of Cabaret Zielona Góra 2007, which is to take place from 5th to 9th of December, 2007, and for the speedway and basketball matches of ZKŻ Zielona Góra and Wiecko Zielona Góra.
Accomplishments: So far I haven't written any articles on the English Wikinews Sorry, I forgot I've written two from an IP address: 1 & 2, but and I've written some (about 16) on the Polish Wikinews. I am an administrator on the Polish Wikipedia (since March 2006, about 14k edits since December 2005) and Wikimedia Commons (since August 2006, about 2,7k edits since 2006), where I operate a bot (flags on ar, cs, da and vec Wikipedias as well). I'm also a member of the Wikimedia Polska Association.
Contact information: e-mail: tomasz.kozlowski@wikinewsie.org (:>) + mobile: +48 667 467 446
User ID: 14255
Applied on: 11:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Questions

edit
  • Can you provide a valid email address? If your accreditation passes you'll get issued a Wikinewsie.org one.
    • It's odder[dot]wiki[at]gmail[dot]com.
  • Are any of the articles written so far original reporting? --Brian McNeil / talk 12:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you get any of the Polish Wikinews admin's/bureaucrats to give you a reference here?
    • I'll ask some of them. odder 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Odder is active wikimedian. He could write very good reportage, if he want to do it. Heh, I'am new admin on pl wikinews, but I'm activ since march 2005. This festival is one of most important in Poland. I believe, that his work will be better than mine and Holek here. Often, if I ask odder for the opinion of mine artcicles on pl wikinews, collaboration is very good. So he is younger than me, but his English is probably better :) Przykuta 16:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I entirely agree with preceding speaker. He is clever and responsible and this accreditation help him very much. (I am sysop since September 2006). Krzysiu Jarzyna 18:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi. Odder is well-known in Polish Wikimedia community, he's also well-experienced in Wikimedia projects. I hope he will receive the accrediation. (sysop since April 2007) Roman 92 dyskusja 22:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will you be doing any translation work, and by that I also mean translating English to Polish Wikinews articles? It would make sense if you go out with an English press badge that you translate your work into English.
    • It's why I'm asking for the accreditation. If I get it, it will help me to enter some press-only parts of the events I've described above, and I'll write the articles about them not only in Polish, but in English as well. I've just added two links to the articles I've written here + this article (e.g.) has been translated by me from en to plwikinews. odder 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you planning on covering any events that are not related to sports? I think we really need more sports editors here, but for our site I think somebody covering Polish events in general would be more useful.
    • Zielona Góra is full of cabarets, so I'll try to focus a little bit on culture. And I'll write something about Polish politics, too, if I get my wireless Internet connection set up again. odder 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you older than, let's say, 16?
--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm 17. odder 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • May you call Ausir and Datrio to say something about you? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 19:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, there will be a problem with Ausir, because he's not very active in WMF projects these days (last edit on plwikinews in June), but I'll ask Datrio, looks like he's somewhere around. odder 14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I want to vote for your accreditation, but I need at least one positive comment from people who are known to me. So, if you have problems to find with Datrio, too, you may ask TOR, Tsca or Polimerek to say something about you. (For other Wikinewsians: TOR is president of WM PL, Tsca and Polimerek are members of the Board of WM PL and Tsca is responsible for very high number of articles on pl.wp :) ) --millosh (talk (sr:)) 01:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply] 
Hi,

Odder asked me to send you a references for his request on accreditation.

I know Odder for last two years. I saw him in real-life first time
during Polish Wikimedia meeting in Chorzów in 2006. He joined
Wikimedia Polska Association on May 2007. He is active and trustworthy
contributor to Polish Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons and Polish
Wikinews. He is an admin of Polish Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons and
wiki of Wikimedia Polska.

I am quite sure that he is trustworthy enough to obtain en-Wikinews
accreditation.

I couldn't write it directly on en-Wikinews accreditiation requests'
page because it is partialy blockek (for newbie edits), and I just
created my account on en-Wikinews.

Comments

edit
  • Per Adam's vote below I would like to say I am opposed to fragmenting the accreditation process across multiple languages. A slow process is underway to set up an organisation to manage this and it will have to coordinate across languages. I feel it is counterproductive to say "go make your own process" then months later have to merge all these slightly different processes under one common set of criteria. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    My comment along the lines of "go make your own process" was on the basis that I was not aware of any plans for a more global WN accreditation. I would be interested in the discussion of such an idea so would ask Brianmc to point out where this is taking place if possible. However, until such a scheme is agreed upon and formed I stand by my opinion that the English Wikinews accreditation process should not be used by users from other languages. Adambro 18:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Question - Brianmc, how slow is this process likely to be? Would it make sense to postbone the accreditation of reporters who are not generally on en.wikinews? Or will it be so long that we should accredit those we deem trustworthy in the meantime? --SVTCobra 02:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The issue is tied into a Wikinews Foundation - or whatever we call it. In the interim I would, as I have done here, support one well supported accreditation for someone on each language under the en: process. Beyond that you are looking at separate languages creating their own process. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


  • User has between 500 and 750 edits on Polish Wikinews since January 2006.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heh, yes I know - Ausir and Datrio was good users, but they are not active "players" now. We want to rebuild our community, but it is not easy. For the moment we have 4-5 very active users. I think that this accreditation will be good motivation for odder. And one more question - pl wikinews is not other wikinews. WORNET is dead for the moment, but we could work together, I hope. But if you know how to get accreditation in other way, just show us. We could show u how to collaborate with other portals ;) Przykuta 17:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
Support, I'm happy with answers and translation work done. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{oppose}}. The polish wikinews is big enough, it can make its own accreditation policy (Yes I know framentation and such). In addition, his contributations to Pl wikinews (~ 600 where 90% were 8 months ago) Is not really big enough for me to vote support. (Yes i know you have huge edits to the rest of the wikimedia world, but I'm just closed minded to anything not wikinews ;-). If you could get a user in high regard at pl wn to vouch for you, I'd change my vote (doubly so if 2 users, or they are someone that has contributed to the english wikinews like Datrio, or Ausir). Bawolff ☺☻ 01:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Oder is supported by pl community, including well known persons; I am sure that he may be helpful here, too; other reasons are inside of my ask for accreditation. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 12:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is succesful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

TheCustomOfLife

edit
Name: Mike Halterman
Location: Tampa, Florida
Areas of interest: Entertainment reporting, preferably in the television field.
Reason: I am currently in the process of interviewing past America's Next Top Model contestants, which have brought a renewed interest to Wikinews as well as the Wikinews Reports blog. If the opportunity presents itself at a future date, I would like to be able to interview more current contestants for Wikinews at premiere parties that The CW hosts in both New York City and Los Angeles. Also, an accomplishment that I am proud of is that I went to the finals at the National Geography Bee nearly 10 years ago, and I would like to use the credentials to also interview some of those kids (the Bee occurs every May in Washington, DC). They're absolutely fascinating, and since I was one of those kids once upon a time, I think it'd be a great boon to our readers to include such first-hand accounts.
Accomplishments: I had edited since 2005 sporadically, but really got into the feel of Wikinews in the fall of 2007 with my Top Model interviews. Here are the two I have completed: Andrea Muizelaar on fashion, anorexia, and life after 'Top Model' and Former 'Top Model' contestant Whitney Cunningham defends plus size models, celebrates the "regular woman". I've also written some local articles at times, such as Arctic air brings coldest night for Florida in five years.
Contact information: Primary e-mail: haltermannews-at-yahoo.com, secondary e-mail: jhalterm-at-mail.usf.edu
User ID: 2327
Applied on: 09:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit
  • What journalism tools do you have, such as maybe a camera or a voice recorder? You don't need any but they can be useful for OR notes (especially recordings of interviews).
  • How strict do you think the WN:OR policy should be interpreted in terms of OR notes?
  • Do you think we should have something like Commons:Meet our photographers, something like Wikinews:Meet our reporters?
--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have a digital camera, but it's currently in the mass at the corner of my room that I never unpacked when I moved. At this point I have not been in the same area as the subject so recording has not been an issue, but I've definitely thought about using a recorder for in-person interviews if anyone I do like is in town.
  • I think OR notes should be very transparent. In my case for some of the Top Models, I used an IRC transcript, which I will not place on the talk page because enough people could have logged it for themselves. I think the IRC chat was the check for transparency in the case with Keenyah, and everyone was able to see that in action. At the very least, it's important to list how you conducted the interview, when it occurred, and where the parties are (if they are not sitting with one another).
  • Definitely. I think it's very important to publicize the people behind Wikinews; any press is good press in terms of our recognition at this point. TheCustomOfLife 23:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit

Comments

edit
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is succesful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Thunderhead

edit
Name: Dodge Story
Location: North Carolina, USA
Areas of Interest: Science and technology, original reporting, etc.
Reason: I've done this before, having full support, but I dropped out early. I can assure you that my real name is Dodge Story (very proud of my unique name). I have done other Original Reporting, including two interviews, and I would like to do a lot more. I am currently an administrator on this wiki, and Meta, and although my activity has dropped a bit due to school and other committments, I can assure you that I am still committed to this project.
Acomplishments: Original reporting, two interviews, admin here and on Meta, taking journalism class in this coming semester, etc.
Contact Info: wm-thunderhead (at) charter (dot) net
User ID: 6488
Applied on: 03:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit
If you square root the amount of money (minus debt), plus the amount of fast cars the average person has, does that make the meaning of life imaginary? Bawolff ☺☻ 03:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it depends on the amount of lawyers that are after you for insurance fraud. If you multiply that times the number of lawyers you have, then divide by the square root of the number of people you're being sued by, then you're left with one. Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 03:48, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, i love my name :) It was more of a joke, my friend called me "Ford" or "Chevy" :) Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 01:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To take over the world, of course! I'd like to be able to do some interviews with local celebrities, and with state legislators. It's not easy securing an interview when you're 14! Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 01:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who would you most like to interview?
Personally, I would like to interview Gov. Easly of North Carolina
    • Would you want IRC (with witnesses), telephone, or face-to-face?
I would perfer to be in-person, but if that's impossible, I would like to use telephone rather than IRC.
Jeremy Paxman! Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 01:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And I assume that Wikinews is going to blow up, right? :P Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 01:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have a lot more time to work with Wikinews then I did a while back, because school was beginning. Hopefully I'll be an asset :) Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 01:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

edit
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is passed 8/1. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Boricuaeddie

edit
Name: Eddie Ortiz Nieves
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico (map)
Areas of interest: Politics, religion, local news
Reason: I am an active user at the Spanish Wikinews, and we don't have an established accreditation system there, so I'll request accreditation here. My user name there is Boricuaeddie (talk – contribs). It's election year in Puerto Rico, and I would like to have the opportunity to interview some of the candidates for the Puerto Rican government. I also have access to Jesuit leaders in Puerto Rico, so I think I could interview them, too. I would obviously translate the interviews to English.
Accomplishments: Here, I have only written Jesuits choose Adolfo Nicolás as their new Superior General, but at the Spanish Wikinews, I have written over 35 articles, have made over 440 edits, and have been a registered user since November 21, 2007. I think my best article there is Obama y Huckabee ganan el caucus de Iowa, which I believe could become a Featured Article, once the FA process, which I created, is approved by the Community. I was also an administrator at the Wikimedia Commons.
Contact information: boricuaeddie@gmail.com
User ID: 17960
Applied on: 17:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit

Voting

edit
Comment Adambro, would you support accreditation being moved to meta? --Brian McNeil / talk 20:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would certainly be more appropriate I feel. Adambro 21:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That may be worth discussing. It certainly would solve the problems that people have of Wikinews giving accreditation for other projects. --David Shankbone 16:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know that the project in development by CraigSpurrier might help solve those problems. --Skenmy(t•c•w) 17:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is passed 6/0. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

NicholasTurnbull

edit
Name: Nicholas J. Turnbull
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, United Kingdom
Areas of interest: General current affairs; specific areas Scientology, sciences, LGBT rights, and the arts
Reason: It may seem rather premature that I be asking for accreditation this early on in my Wikinews career (although I am, however, an administrator on the English Wikipedia -- see my user page). I am doing so because I would like to work on more first hand interviews and other original research and, to do so with sufficient credibility, it would be a great help to be able to show some kind of press credentials to interview candidates. I would like to do first-hand audio reporting as well as I feel this would make Audio Wikinews even more useful to potential listeners; perhaps I may even be able to do video interviews at some point. These are all things I would like to do which would be aided by accrediation.
Accomplishments: David S. Touretzky discusses Scientology, Anonymous and Tom Cruise; also see Wikinews:Audio Wikinews where I write and record the News Briefs, still intermittent alas
Contact information: nicholas (dot) turnbull (at) gmail (dot) com
User ID: 18733
Applied on: 08:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit
  • How much time do you think you will be having for Wikinews?
  • Are you first and foremost a Wikipedian or a Wikimedian?
  • What differences between Wikipedia and Wikinews have you experienced yet?
  • Would you add your own pictures and interviews to Wikipedia articles, or is that COI?
  • What do you mean by "perhaps I may even be able to do video interviews at some point"?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 12:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Four questions from David Shankbone:

  • Question: What kinds of stories interest you?
  • Question: If you could have a recurring feature on Wikinews, what would it be?
  • Question: Do you think that to maintain accreditation a minimum number of OR stories should be produced per month?
  • Question: Wikinews is currently faced with some important issues about how to remain true to its policies while increasing readership and experimenting with content. Do you plan to participate in the discussion about these news directions?

--David Shankbone - (talk) 04:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to questions by User:Stevenfruitsmaak

edit

((Wikinews (Michaël Laurent))) : How much time do you think you will be having for Wikinews?

Nicholas Turnbull: I fear this is one of those classic questions like "how long is a piece of string?". It is highly difficult for me to give a precise estimate, simply because my "real life" workload at university and in my paid work fluctuates wildly (as you can probably tell from the hesitant schedule of the News Briefs). However, my erratic contribution is something which I intend to work assiduously on changing, and I hope to be able to offer at least two hours' work per day in future. This would be about right for publishing one News Brief per evening; and during weekends I may (but cannot promise) to be able to work for much longer on Wikinews copy and interviews. The evasive answer to this question would be "ask me again in two weeks' time"; but, more seriously, I think the two hours' work a day is probably a good target. What would be really helpful would be for more people to assist me with things like scriptwriting for my spoken recordings, so I can maximise the use of my time here.
If you want a scriptwriter for audio wikinews, I could offer some help, although I noticed that you often correct a written text as your read it out loud. Secondly, I think you'll get burn-out very soon if you spend 2 hours per day: 1 hour might be a more realistic goal. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

((WN)) : Are you first and foremost a Wikipedian or a Wikimedian?

NT: I was solely a Wikipedian for a long time (since Sept '04, counting the start of my anon contributions); but I confess that I have veered away from Wikipedia lately simply because, bizarre as it sounds, I found a distinct lack of anything to actually write: on the English Wikipedia there is a lot of tweaking, changing, maintenance and mechanisms to be attended to, and it is very difficult to find an article topic these days that one can work solidly on in order to produce a well-written piece of work to one's own standards of quality. This is why, more recently, I have taken up work on Wikinews. I suppose I trend more towards being a Wikimedian than a Wikipedian, because I think I tend to integrate better with the Wikimedia-wide community than specifically the Wikipedian culture. Certainly, this is more in keeping with my philosophies on collaboration across projects publishing different types of media across different nationalities, but using the same wiki format.

((WN)) : Would you add your own pictures and interviews to Wikipedia articles, or is that COI?

NT: In general, I would add my own pictures if they were appropriate, but not my interviews: the reason for this is because I believe it to be of questionable journalistic and editorial ethics to use your own article as a tertiary source. I think that if one's interviews are worth inclusion on Wikipedia, someone will notice this, and add it themselves -- a far more honest way of working. I did have a brief stint in the "real" publishing world some time ago as a freelancer, which reminds me of Bismarck's observation that men should never have to know how either laws or sausages are made -- the same is true with much of the in-print media, where proper academic diligence and ethics relating to reporting is, in fact, widely ignored where it is not seen by the readership. I have witnessed "facts" being fabricated from mere imaginative speculation by editors looking to fill that lonely eight column-inches somewhere within the depths of a magazine due to impossibly tight deadlines to "pass for press", and newscopy "top-and-tailed", direct plagiarism in all but name, from point-of-view press releases and rival news sources without attribution. I do not believe Wikimedia operates in this manner; I believe this lack of mercenary fabrication to be one of its principal assets, and I vehemently oppose anyone doing this -- most of all myself.

((WN)) : What do you mean by "perhaps I may even be able to do video interviews at some point"?

NT: I have a dream of sorts which I would, at some indeterminate point in the future, like to pursue: do video recorded first-person news reports for breaking stories, in the manner of correspondents' reports such as used on television news. More realistically, audio interviews with witnesses of events, with notable individuals and experts would add a more multimedia aspect to Wikinews' original research reporting, as well as providing additional interest to readers of ours. I think this may have the potential also to expose Wikinews to a wider audience by providing a ready-made source of material for audio or video "podcasts" and downloadable news summaries, an extension of my existing work on Audio Wikinews. The audio interviews would certainly be possible at the present time; the video interviews would require the services of a friendly cameraman with equipment to video the event and my speech, which will obviously require more work in procuring. I believe, however, a brave new world stands before us in this direction, which would bring us into the league of a major newscaster as opposed to simply a newswire service.
NT: Thank you very much for your questions; I hope I have covered what you wanted to know adequately. With my best regards, --NicholasTurnbull 18:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your eloquent responses, I can discern that brevity is not a natural talent of yours :-). --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to questions by User:David Shankbone

edit

((Wikinews (David Shankbone))) : What kinds of stories interest you?

NT: Well, as far as the News Briefs go, I admit that most of the summarising is extremely general, as one has to try and make a decent survey of all of the broad areas of interest where current news stories are available. I know this may sound ridiculously broad, but it is truly the case that anything which has an impact on a populace interests me with regards to original reporting. Specific interests within my fields of expertise are Scientology (because of my expertise as a former member), artificial intelligence/computer science (because I study that at university), literature and the arts (as a hoping-to-be-published writer and occasional actor) and LGBT rights (as a committee member of my university's LGBT Society, drag queen, and observer of Britain's gay scene). I imagine these latter fields will form the core of my OR at least from the outset; but in no way do I wish to limit myself to them: if I find a good story, I shall report on it.

((WN)) : If you could have a recurring feature on Wikinews, what would it be?

NT: In a regard, if the Audio Wikinews News Briefs were to be more frequent (which I think they will be from Saturday onwards), I could be said to already have my recurring feature in reporting published Wikinews copy in a radio-style newscasting format. I personally think that too little attention is paid on Wikinews to developments in the sciences and technology; we seem to have excellent coverage of terrorist attacks, elections, military action and dead United States governmental figures, but little emphasis on scientific discovery and academia. Perhaps a "Wikinews Scientific Bulletins" feature might be of value? The other one would be international LGBT rights, which haven't really been covered very well either on Wikinews, at least not directly.

((WN)) : Do you think that to maintain accreditation a minimum number of OR stories should be produced per month?

NT: It is difficult to quantify work in terms of published stories or number of edits made to Wikinews, because one particularly involved or difficult-to-obtain OR story may well be worth four weaker ones in terms of value to the Wikinews readership, and in aggregate time spent developing it. I don't think a minimum OR requirement should be set for a further issue of unfortunate circumstances: it may simply be a reporters' specific field did not yield a newsworthy story, or that reporter was particularly busy in their real-life commitments, and thus may not produce their quota. In a similar manner to the way that Wikipedia considers administrator rights to be "no big deal", I think we should consider accreditation "no big deal" unless evidence presents itself that shows that person is detrimental to the Wikinews reporting effort due to unprofessional or damaging conduct, in which case it should be withdrawn expeditiously. For users who do not contribute for very long periods of time, it may be reasonable to assume that accreditation expires.

((WN)) : Wikinews is currently faced with some important issues about how to remain true to its policies while increasing readership and experimenting with content. Do you plan to participate in the discussion about these news directions?

NT: If I may refer to my reply above to Steven Fruitsmaak's questions above, I have been considering using different forms of multimedia content for presenting Wikinews information, and perhaps in doing so including more first-hand recorded material that would otherwise have not had a place within the standard Wikinews publishing environment. Moreover, there is the existing question as to how NPOV should be implemented in news reporting, in that it may be more preferable to some readers to have point-of-view editorial commentary in addition to our neutrally-presented news. I intend, thus, to participate fully in this discussion, and assist in experimenting with these emerging formats.
NT: Thank you for your questions, David; please do let me know if there are any points I have made here that you would like me to clarify. Yours, --NicholasTurnbull - (talk) 04:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit

Please use {{support}}, {{oppose}}, {{neutral}}, or {{comment}}

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this page's talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Accreditation_requests/Archive_1&oldid=4639067"