Wikinews

Wikinews:Accreditation requests/Archive 2

< 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 and here.

Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is no consensus S:4/O:2/N:1. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Ragesoss

edit
Name: Sage Ross
Location: West Hartford, Connecticut
Areas of interest: Politics, science, academia
Reason: With press credentials, I could take better pictures at political and other events. In addition to photography, I would also write stories (as I have done before) on events I attend. I would, for example, attempt to attend the Democratic National Convention in August (which will be a very newsworthy event if the Democratic primary is still undecided by convention time) to take pictures and report for Wikinews.
Accomplishments: On Wikinews: Half of life could go extinct by century's end, warn eminent biologists, Protesters demonstrate at US Coast Guard Academy. I've also written many articles on English Wikipedia, including most of several Featured Articles (Johannes Kepler, Rachel Carson, History of biology), and several articles for the Wikipedia Signpost, some of which involved original reporting. I'm an admin there as well. For more details on my involvement with Wikipedia and Commons, see my en-wiki user page and this gallery of notable people photos.
Contact information: ragesoss(plus)wikinews(at)gmail(dot)com
User ID: 14426
Applied on: 02:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit

Some of my patented though questions...

  • Which Wikimedia projects do you think were bad ideas ideas from the start, and what should be done with them?
    • Wikispecies is the main one that comes to mind. I imagine it will be closed down sooner or later, probably sometime after the Encyclopedia of Life really takes off. All of the projects fall short of their potential in various ways, but the only other one that is of dubious value is Wikiquote. The wiki format, at least without considerable changes, seems inappropriate for that project, and of course there's the fundamental problem of fair use that Wikiquote can't avoid. But at this point, I don't think it could be shut down without an unacceptable level of hurt feelings and damage to the communities of other projects.--ragesoss 16:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is your take on the relation between Wikinews and Wikipedia?
    • Will Wikipedia continue to overshadow Wikinews in terms of news coverage, and should there be changes?
      • I think it probably will continue to overshadow Wikinews, simply because news coverage on Wikipedia does something different from what news sites (including Wikinews) are trying to do. A continuously updated overview of a multifaceted news topic is a very different goal from a series of reports about the latest developments of a news topic. People want both at various times, but there's nowhere else to go for what Wikipedia does, while even if Wikinews becomes a comprehensive, high-volume news site there will still be many alternatives. I'm deeply disappointed that more Wikipedians don't cross over to Wikinews, and many small scale news articles on Wikipedia would probably be better off on Wikinews. But overall, the main change that should be made is just more participation in Wikinews. --ragesoss 16:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can Wikinews be seen as an "original reporting" extension of Wikipedia, a means to get photographs and interviews with notable people?
  • At this point, sort of. We all realize that Wikinews could be much more than it is, but until it really develops a core competency (either broad, consistent coverage of a particular topic, like internet/technology news, or a regular output of unique investigative journalism that brings people to the site just to see if there's anything new) Wikinews's most valuable content will be interviews and photographs. Calling that an "extension of Wikipedia" may not be fair, but photos and interviews will have lasting usefulness for Wikipedia in a way that some other kinds of original reporting won't. When Wikinews has a large enough independent readership, there will be more incentive to do reporting that can't also be used by Wikipedia.--ragesoss 16:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you add your own pictures (and maybe original reporting articles) to Wikipedia articles, or is that COI?
  • I do add my own pictures to Wikipedia. I take many pictures with Wikipedia in mind. I wouldn't feel comfortable adding my own original reporting for Wikinews to Wikipedia articles (possibly with the exception of interviews). Wikipedia articles are meant to reflect the balance of focus on a topic, and there's a problem with synthesizing that balanced version and at the same time tipping the balance one way or another in terms of whatever the original reporting focused on. There's not a problem with doing Wikinews reporting on topics you are interested in and think important. There is a problem with skewing Wikipedia articles toward the aspects of a topic that you are interested in and think important. So, yes, I think COI is a potential problem with users who work on the same topics in both Wikinews and Wikipedia, although I wouldn't say that it's automatically a problem.--ragesoss 16:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • How could the Signpost and Wikinews work together better?
    • Wikinews and the Signpost have very different intended audiences. Some of the Signpost reports about Wikipedia stories in the mainstream media might also be appropriate for Wikinews, but in general I think the area of overlap is small.--ragesoss 16:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Four questions from David Shankbone:

  • Question: What kinds of stories interest you?
    • Answer: I'm interested in all sorts of stories: politics, science, arts, culture, technology. I'm mainly interested in reporting on political events and academia-related topics.--ragesoss - (talk) 05:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: If you could have a recurring feature on Wikinews, what would it be?
    • Answer: That's not something I've thought about, so I'm shooting from the hip here... How about a feature that brings together (and translated, when necessary) the most relevant citizen-journalism and blogging for a particular current topic of interest? Being able to put a different angle on, e.g., a presidential campaign (local bloggers from an upcoming primary state or interviews with campaign volunteers), the writers' strike, or elections in Pakistan, using internet sources, would be a way to bring Wikinews to a higher level of relevancy while taking advantage of Wikimedians' strengths in online information gathering. Pointing people to nontraditional sources for ongoing news issues could be a major strength.--ragesoss - (talk) 05:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: Do you think that to maintain accreditation a minimum number of OR stories should be produced per month?
    • Answer: No. At this point, Wikinews should be focused on growth, and should not shut out potential contributors who would only want to do original reporting occasionally. If a Wikimedian is a strong contributor another project and accreditation will allow him or her to occasionally do some original reporting for Wikinews, we should make that as easy as possible.--ragesoss - (talk) 05:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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?
    • Answer: I don't usually spend much time on policy discussions, but I think growth-focused changes to Wikinews policy are probably more significant decisions the vast majority of Wikipedia policy debates. So yes, I will pitch in to the discussion when I think I have something new to add.--ragesoss - (talk) 05:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Question: You state above, "If a Wikimedian is a strong contributor another project and accreditation will allow him or her to occasionally do some original reporting for Wikinews, we should make that as easy as possible." Does this mean that your primary motive for accreditation is non-Wikinews projects? What would you need accreditation for on Wikinews (or other Wikimedia projects)? --David Shankbone - (talk) 18:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Answer: No, I'm requesting accreditation for purposes of Wikinews reporting. I would, of course, also get photographs that would be used for Wikipedia and Commons. As I suggested above, the specific reporting assignment I have in mind that prompted me to request credentials is the Democratic National Convention. I can't think of any times when I would want to take advantage of accreditation except for Wikinews reporting or photo opportunities with notable people. It's just that, even if accredited, I only anticipate using the credentials when newsworthy happenings coincide with my schedule, which only happens occasionally.--ragesoss - (talk) 01:20, 14 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.


Consensus has been reached on this Accreditation request, and the result is candidate withdraws at oppose 2/0. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

User:Chris Mann

edit
Name: Chris Mann
Location: Canberra, Australia
Areas of interest: Australian topics - events, politics, perhaps pop culture
Reason: I am planning to solicit some interviews from various Australians (starting with my "boss", w:Brian Pink - and yes I know the WN:COI issues involved with that), but I would rather do so as an accredited Wikinews reporter than as a "freelancer" writing for Wikinews.
Accomplishments: The only two articles I have written here are Australian Liberal Party criticised over fake pamphlets and Two thirds of Queensland flooded; "disaster zone" declared, both synthesis articles. However, I hope that they (as well as the article I started on Wikipedia, w:Animania) demonstrate my ability to write in accordance with all relevant policies.
Contact information: E-mail
User ID: 8359
Applied on: 09:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments

edit
  • Fair enough. But the accreditation still makes a difference, in my opinion. As to your oppose vote, can I assume that by "too new" you actually mean "not enough edits/articles written"? Because I've been registered here for a year and a half (although admittedly I only started really editing here about half a year ago), and I have a longer history on Wikipedia if you want to check that as well. Chris Mann (Say hi!|Stalk me!) 12:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I never say "freelance citizen journalist accredited by the Wikinews community" and I never will. First, "Citizen Journalist" is a new term that has little meaning to anyone but us. Second, I think it is perfectly acceptable to simply state your purpose. The moment I approach a person with the idea I may give it to Wikinews, or I may shop it around to other venues, it when I will say I am a "freelance journalist". I say, "I am doing an interview for Wikinews, a sister project of Wikipedia." That's my introduction. We have all these "work around" and semantics we use to make what we think are important distinctions clear to people who really do not care. "I'm going to talk to you, where am I going to see it?" Answer: "Wikinews, and probably a link to it on Wikipedia." --David Shankbone - (talk) 13:29, 13 February 2008 (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 passed S:10/O:3/N:1. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

WikiBlue

edit
Name: Sandra Ordonez
Location: St. Petersburg, Florida
Areas of interest: Pop culture and web 2.0, also marketing wikinews
Reason: To be able to accomplish tasks successfully. It opens doors to people and organizations.
Accomplishments: 'Top Model' winner Jaslene Gonzalez on her career and being a Latina role model
Contact information: SandraTordonez@hotmail.com
User ID:19450
Applied on: 00:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments

edit
  • Sandra Ordonez was the Wikimedia Foundation's Communications Manager from January 2007 to January 2008, and has real-life experience in media and public relations. She was also my mentor when I interned there. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 00:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • WikiBlue's work here is minimal, are there other WMF accounts that might shed light on this user's Wiki contributions? --SVTCobra 00:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • She was kind of...busy working at the actual WMF office to do that sort of thing. But since she's been working in the office, she knows how things go on around here. One of my jobs under her was to help prepare tutorials on basic rules for newcomers. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 01:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What some seem to be forgetting is that WikiBlue has been working behind the scenes as opposed to on-wiki. Her contributions to the Foundation are significant, she's likely drafted hundreds of press releases for the WMF and dealt with press enquiries - including The Register - for approximately a year. Most of that goes unseen unless you see her name mentioned in the press. We have Rico from Taiwan on the accredited user list, and his contributions always need copyedited due to weak English. I trust Sandy to become more accomplished at editing on-wiki over time and to conduct herself professionally when interviewing. Where people are opposed I'd like to see them outline specific goals for her to meet that would make them change their vote. It is my opinion that Sandy would be a valuable addition to the team and another contact that has the ear of people within WMF. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Not meaning to be purposely offensive here, but why only those who Oppose? Sandy obviously has a wealth of experience to bring to the project. But everyone else has had to "climb the ladder" - so why should she be any different? I'd like to see some articles before I support it. It's not a personal attack on her or her intentions / experience, but rather I cannot see any current intentions for her to continue with Wikinews. Perhaps if she could outline a couple of her own personal targets it would help to sway me and the other opposers? But I'm not prepared to outline my own targets for her, Brian. That's demeaning to both me and her. --Skenmy(t•c•w) 11:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Skenmy on the whole. Despite her likely to become a useful addition to the Wikinews team, I see no real urgency with this request that would prompt me to ignore my desire to see a reasonable edit history here. From what I can see, there isn't a great deal of contributions elsewhere either. Whilst I'm sure she has benefited the project in her official capacity I would suggest that this might not fully indicate her ability as an editor, writing articles and dealing with the community in a different way to what she may be more accustomed. Anyway, I don't consider it appropriate to simply grant accreditation because someone is trustworthy, they might receive accreditation then go onto make few contributions to the project. At least if she gains experience here then she might be better position to consider whether she's interested in becoming a more permanent member of the community. This would also allow her to judge whether not having accreditation has been a barrier to any work and so consider whether or not accreditation is necessary.
    I think is particularly interesting to note the "welcome to Wikinews" in one of the support votes. Shouldn't this say it all? Some users might be familiar with this individual but I, and I'm sure many other WN users, aren't. Adambro - (talk) 18:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

edit

How do you intend to apply your media experience to Wikinews? --Brian McNeil / talk 08:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, (at least in the USA) public relations and journalism go hand in hand. The PR background gives you the know how to tap into more resources, b/c you understand how media works. While I will be editing articles etc, I would actually like to dedicate myself to helping publicize and market Wikinews to the general public. Accreditation would help in this process. If I contact reporter X about Wikinews to pitch a story, for example, it would be very beneficial to have some type of official affiliation...(remember real world works on "credits")

There are many roles for volunteers and I think I should focus on the area that I'm best at. I have MANY outreach ideas and programs for wikinews....including hosting online seminars on journalism ethics with respected "guest" journalists, getting more people from the media involved in actually volunteering and providing support, reaching out to high school students, etc, mucho stuff :) I love Wikinews, and I would like to help it "grow and prosper."

As a potential accredited reporter you will need to understand Wikinews guidlines and policy. Do you underestand the Wikinews inerview guidelines, origial reporting guidlines and other relevnt policies like NPOV? --Anonymous101 Talk 13:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the basic core values and dynamic that govern all the projects. I also understand the PR guidelines that Foundation's communication committee try to promote in regards to promoting our projects. In regards to Wikinews, I had to explain to the project to the media, but particular during the benoit case and for David's recent interview - both which really put Wikinews on the map for the main stream press. In regards to using the Wiki, I had to use several to perform my job. Of course there are things that I am a bit weak in and I'm sure there might a bit of a learning curve, but I have both the resources and the foundation to get up to speed right away. As I mentioned to Brian, I completely understand the concerns that some individuals might have right now - and I don't mind waiting - I'm not going anywhere :) Like most projects, Wikinews has its own culture, and contributing is different just talking about it to the press. Sooo, /me is happy that I can just be part of this :)

Votes

edit
She was the PR person at the head office. I think she knows how things are done since it was her job to let the press know how things are done. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 07:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't mean I beleive she will use it to *harm* Wikinews - but the contribution level is very low at the moment and I can't see any ideaologies for continuing to contribute to Wikinews. --Skenmy(t•c•w) 10:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy has been talking about working on Wikinews since prior to finishing up as Communications Manager at WMF. She'd initially said she wanted to take a break before becoming involved - to do things like a house move. However TheCustomOfLife (Mike) persuaded her to take on an interview with one of the ANTM winners and whilst it needed copyedit work she'd professionally conducted the interview and - at least in my opinion - would not in any way abuse Wikinews credentials. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Too new. —FellowWiki Newsie 21:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per Custom and Brian. We have to take into consideration Wikimedia work. Sandy also has contacts as the Communications Manager, Sandy has invaluable experience and contacts to help us market ourselves, and that is sorely needed. Accreditation is a trust issue, not a contribution issue. Though the two are often interrelated, here full faith and credit for a Foundation person should come into play. --David Shankbone - (talk) 21:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good to see the response - that's what I needed to see. Welcome! --Skenmy(t•c•w) 10:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now; although I trust her, I'd like for her to spend a month or so to acquire and show basic on-wiki skills to ensure all the wonderful things she could do for us off-line go smoothly, and that she could contribute to articles sufficiently. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 11:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Sorry been busy with interviews. Of course support. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 16:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. To me it is quite clear. Sandy has my full trust, and the article she has published so far shows her to be a great writer. I'm confident that she is fully adept at using Wikis and familiar with policy, having worked in the WMF office and, undoubtedly, observing all of the projects and learning vast amounts about them, despite perhaps not having the time to participate A full support from me Martinp23 - (talk) 22:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Incredibly trustworthy, has been with Wikimedia for over a year and has a lot of experience that would help Wikinews. Cbrown1023 talk 02:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Well let's see this demonstrated before starting granting accreditation. We know very little about this users ability to contribute to Wikinews or WMF projects in general as an editor. Her low activity in the last few days since requesting accreditation hardly demonstrate there is an real urgency to this. I'm sure she is capable of writing great news stories without accreditation, something which should only be granted to editors which the community are familiar with. Whilst some know this user from elsewhere, I don't think it can be said that the community as a whole does. It is very wrong to let this process turn into an popularity contest, rather it should be an assessment of their contributions to Wikinews of which this user has made very little. Adambro - (talk) 13:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But it isn't a popularity contest (and sorry for ranting at you in IRC the other day Adambro.) As David Shankbone pointed out it is a matter of trust coming before contributions. I C/E'd Sandy's article and the main changes needed were to merge short paragraphs and use synonyms for "stated". Not a big deal, and not as much work as doing one of Rico's articles can be. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I have full faith in Sandy's ability to contribute to Wikinews and no doubt about her trustworthiness. Cary Bass - (talk) 17:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - There are impressive testimonials in favor of this candidate, yet we have near nothing as far as past contributions and I find the reason why accredation is needed, To be able to accomplish tasks successfully. It opens doors to people and organizations, to be lacking in specificity and commitment to contribute to Wikinews. This would have been a clear {{oppose}} were it not for the vouching by other Wikinewsies, whom I trust. That said, these vouchers all ran along the lines of the trustworthiness and ability of WikiBlue, and not on confidence that WikiBlue will actually contribute to Wikinews. I hope this confidence is not misplaced. --SVTCobra 01:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, she's one of my real-life mentors. She isn't a mustache-twirling villain. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 18:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, so you say ... and I trust you (and some of the others above) ... so let's hope this isn't fruitless. --SVTCobra 02:31, 21 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 withdrawn - credentials retained. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

David Shankbone

edit

David has retired - again - (see diff). This is getting to be an annoying habit (See [1], [2], and [3]).

This is a serious distraction to the project, and could easily be viewed as "emotional blackmail". The key concern is that having retired from the project there is no way to verify if credentials are being used in some other way outside the Wikinews project. De-accreditation will result in the changing of David's email to a redirect to scoop as was done for Ed Brown.

Listed: 09:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments

edit
  • (moving my reasoning to comments) I am going to have to support as well. I appreciate all the work David has done for Wikinews and for Wikimedia in general. He's clearly dedicated, has a great long-term vision, and his interviews...they're all of an exceptional caliber. But at the same time, I'm not going to kiss anyone's boots and go "oh my god please don't go" if David doesn't feel appreciated enough, or didn't get enough praise for a certain article, or anything like that. I have said it before, and I'll say it again; I am not anyone's mommy or anyone's therapist, and I find it unfair that the community has to be drawn into these kinds of dramatic games. I know this issue has come up before, and many users pretty much voiced the same displeasure I did, if maybe not as strongly. If there's an underlying issue here, then it needs to be addressed away from this specific venue, and on David's own time. It's really not our job or obligation to make any reporter feel better about themselves. Our job is to report news, whether it be a big event, something in our own backyards, or a human-interest interview. That is our job. Wikinews means something to a lot of reporters here. With David's flights of fancy and posting "retired" four times in as many months to come back the next day, and especially since this most recent "retired" notice comes as he is going to Rio de Janeiro AS A WIKIMEDIA REPRESENTATIVE, that just irks me, badly. I think we as a community finally have to draw the line and say, "Enough is enough." Who knows, this may be the most crucial test, to see if, to David, his intentions for reporting for Wikinews are actually for the project, and not to boost his own status or use his accreditation as a symbol. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 10:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the February 18 retiral I ended up spending several hours composing emails to persuade David to change his mind and get Sandy Ordonez to have a word with him about it. If/when his email is closed it will redirect to scoop and have an auto-responder message stating the user is retired. If David wants to come back, or thinks he might come back, he should have specified that he was on wiki-break, not retired. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • while i accept there are legitimate concerns behind this debate, i don't think holding it just now is a good idea. by the looks of it, DS has been the subject of a fair amount of harassment on WP, which appears to have led to this (and previous?) decisions to retire. rather than immediately hold this revocation debate right now, i think we should let a few days go by and perhaps talk to DS in private as well. DS has contributed a good deal to WN and i think we can offer him, at the very least, a opportunity to hand back his credentials himself on retirement. –Doldrums(talk) 10:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The drama and fits of leaving and the lack of communication...all of that needs to stop. I think in the past we've been quite accommodating here about his leaving and coming back. I don't think it's unreasonable that on the fourth time that we've gotten a bit tired of it. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 11:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting someone's credentials to be revoked is a very serious matter. It's true that his coming and going affects the community, but I think everyone should show a little more Zen and stop overreacting themselves. Anyway, I don't think these arguments about his personality can ever be a valid reason to revoke. The only sensible thing I've heard so far is that he should go to Rio de Janeiro while retired. I would very much like DS to address this latter point. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
DS has told me in an e-mail that he has cancelled his trip to Brazil. I'm with Doldrums here; I understand some people have strong feelings about this, but this can wait until everything has cooled down a bit. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a project axiom we often state, "Wikinews is not Wikipedia". If David is choosing to mix Wikipedia and Wikinews and leave this project as a result of harassment over on WP then so be it. He should know full well that were he harassed on Wikinews it would be quickly and decisively dealt with. The two projects are not the same - we pride ourselves on that.
As those who closely follow Recent Changes will note, I have extended the deadline for revocation of credentials to 14 days so that this case is given some time for due consideration. This means people need not vote right now and can instead comment. From what Doldrums states above, David may have been harassed on Wikipedia, does someone who opposes this measure want to give examples of what the provocation is? As I see no provocation on the Wikinews project I consider this simply a petulant act, a fourth occurrence of such, and something I'm now sick of. I learned how to deal with abuse and trolling on Usenet, there's no room for being a overly sensitive person who takes criticism badly there. David? He wouldn't last ten minutes on Usenet if this is how he reacts when given some flack on another project. When I dealt with his February 18 retiral I suggested a wiki-break; had he used a template to indicate he was taking a break instead of retiring then this entire discussion would not be here. Nobody is going to be critical because someone takes a break due to stress, personal life issues, or anything like that; in most cases people are only going to get involved if the break becomes prolonged and they miss the contributor.
To sum up, if David wants to work on Wikinews it is time for him to grow a much thicker skin, apologise for all the drama he keeps causing when he doesn't get his way, and go back to doing what he is really good at - interesting interviews. --Brian McNeil / talk 17:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And one thing that gets to me is that Steven got a reply from David, yet David couldn't be bothered to remark on this here. I'm assuming he knows about it, what's the deal? This is exactly the kind of drama and lack of communication that I'm fed up with. I shouldn't be wondering why he isn't here or why he isn't speaking about it at this venue. If anything, this has strengthened my removal vote even more. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 20:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that only accredited reporters who have misused their credentials granted to them (as can be proved through concrete evidence) may be listed here......Can someone tell me where he misused the credentials? DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly a situation in which David's is unique...this has never happened before. How can policies be written for things we didn't foresee? It's like case law, as it were. One case will be telling for future cases like these. There was no process to deal with this beforehand, now we're making one. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 23:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
DragonFire1024, you were quick enough to support de-accreditation of Ed Brown who there was no evidence of having abused his credentials. I certainly wouldn't put the two cases in the same class, but you are being inconsistent.
It is about time we cleaned up the list of accredited reporters and in a couple of weeks time I will be proposing changes to the policy, or simply being bold and making them for others to fine-tune. For people who've been away for 6 months with no main namespace edits the privilege should be removed. I would make exceptions for people who have put up an appropriate {{wikibreak}} notice and continue to stay in touch, but those who don't, well...
Giving examples of where this is an issue, several months ago I sent an email to the scoop address asking people to simply let me know they'd received the email so I could confirm they were active and bump up their quota to 30MB. There are still a good number of people haven't responded to that, or to my repeated requests for a passport-style photograph and brief bio to go on the Wikinewsie site. I'd welcome constructive suggestions on how we prune back the list to people who can reasonably be expected to respond and give enough details to maintain WN:CV and the wikinewsie site. Not the goddamned drama you inflicted on the rest of us in IRC yesterday. Policy is not set in stone, moves must be made to move it along and allow it to evolve into something that keeps the site functioning smoothly. We keep arguing it should be easy to get accreditation, and the flip side of that is you should either surrender it or accept you may lose it if you become inactive or retire from the project. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


  • If this user has left the project then fair enough, remove their credentials, if they haven't then don't, they've made a great deal of valuable contributions. I think the problem here is that we simply don't know what is the case when this user keeps retiring then returning. The community can appreciate that not everyone can contribute all of the time. A simple note stating that the user expects to be inactive for a period of time would be helpful, continuously switching between active and retired isn't. It is simply disruptive. Whilst I don't believe that David would in any way abuse the credentials, if he is stating that he is retired is a strong signal then he no longer needs them so support the removal. Adambro - (talk) 22:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is {{wikibreak}} for that. {{retired}} has an air of finality about that and this is effectively a reverse of "the boy who cried wolf". It's been done so often it is getting taken at face value. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; I find this whole process absurd. David is a valued contributor who's chosen to take some time off ("retired", "inactive", are we really going to argue over the fucking semantics here?), and I see no problem with him holding his accreditation for the time being. He left one day ago. I understand some users are frustrated with his demeanor as of late, but is it really necessary to try to humiliate him as well? And to those citing drama, how will this help? None of David's "drama" has involved his use of accreditation. If he comes back, "drama" is just as likely without the tools, in his case. The real drama is in this request. Ral315 (talk) 10:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hostage? If hwe is being harassed on WP, then there s no reason for us to revoke anything. If WP cannot stop thier rampage, then someone or something needs to intervene. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 22:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Considering David's colorful history on both sites, I think we should perhaps take it with a grain of salt...maybe not every problem that he's run into here is of him being the "victim," as it were. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 22:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Since McNeil suggested voting be belayed, I will just comment. To me the only real disruption is this revocation request. The comings-and-goings of David Shankbone don't disrupt anything. If people are annoyed that they are spending time asking him to come back or asking other people to talk to him, well, then don't engage in those activities. As David has already shown, he does change his mind from time-to-time. This vote seems premature, as well as unwarranted. There is no evidence that he intends to abuse the credentials, in fact there are testimonials to the contrary, such as the cancellation of the Rio trip. Removal of credentials could only serve to ensure that David never comes back. Comments on other comments here: Intervening in something on WP is not our job; I don't believe that inactivity is grounds for removal of acceditation or adminship. --SVTCobra 23:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment David's been going through a lot of shit, some of which involve bad decisions on his part. I've spoken to him privately and I have a pretty good idea of the why's and wherefores of recent days, and while I really appreciate his work both here, and on Commons, I am personally supporting his decision to take an extended break. Maybe "retirement" is a bit strong, but given what I know of his personal circumstances, I'm not surprised he said that. I'm sure that he regrets his waffling before...
He wanted me to pass on that he's "just chillaxin', trying to keep a low profile, 'suffering from exhaustion', focusing on my paying job, and just getting myself together." With all that, I see absolutely no good reason to remove his credentials. He's still quite a benefit to the project and will continue to be. Cary Bass - (talk) 05:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm going to say this again, for the benefit of people who didn't get it... David can end the circus and get my vote struck if he apologises for causing drama and changes the template on his user page to {{wikibreak}}. When I say apologises, I mean right here, in this comments section. I was copied in on private communication where he highlighted a diff of someone hassling him on Wikipedia. The concern there is that the IP address in question was Manhattan-based and potentially someone who knew him off-wiki. Most people here know what happens on Wikinews when you hassle a valued contributor, we're tight-knit and stick together. A block for such behaviour would be swiftly implemented and - if need be - CheckUser would be employed to assist David in reporting a stalking incident to his local police (Note, I'd have to consult with checkuser-l on what was allowed there). Were I the one being harassed I'd take a perverse joy in getting someone a visit from the police, and nastygrams from their ISP. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
Comment This vote currently sits at no consensus. I would politely like to request that people defer adding any more votes for a few days and engage in constructive discussion in the above section. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request withdrawn/motion to withdraw

edit
  • Having exchanged emails with David and spoken off-wiki to a few people he has shared more information with I now consider this to have been an ill-judged move. I have thus struck the above and left it for someone to archive or otherwise remove from this page. I would hope this would allow us to move on to other things such as the WN:WM2008 access bid and a revision of accreditation rules to remove those who no longer contribute. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:08, 4 March 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 withdrawn. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Ryan524

edit
Name: Ryan Bilesky
Location: Pacific Northwest
Areas of interest: Technology
Reason: It would br a great chance to be able to go out and do some original reporting, obvious accreditation will provide me with some credentials I can actualy use to get access to get pictures or info for a story.
Accomplishments: I was an admin prior to going of a long wikibreak, I stepped down when I went on the wikibreak. I have done alot of cleanup type tasks in the past, recently getting into writing articles, I wrote Microsoft's attempt to buy out Yahoo may never happen almost entirely from scratch. I also was one who worked on Saddam Hussein executed by hanging when it was breaking news. Another use created a one line article on it which I worked oon turning it into what it is with the help of some great users, I only wsh they were around back in the day...
Contact information: Ryan524@gmail.com
User ID: 1248
Applied on: 02:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
At this time I think I will not seek Accreditation, I am herby canceling my request.--Ryan524 - (talk) 22:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

edit
  • Accreditation would help anyone "get access", as you put it, but do you have anything specific in mind in this request? That is, do you have plans to attend something where accreditation is required? --SVTCobra 23:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
  • Oppose I don't think you've ever done any OR (correct me if I am wrong) --A101 - (talk) 05:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The requirements for accredidation are: being an established Wikinews editor (or a contributor to another Wikimedia Foundation project) for several weeks, done; having started several articles on Wikinews or another project, I wouldn't say i've started "several" here but between that and other projects; commitment to NPOV as shown by edits and initial text, I think I have enough non-cleanup edits to show this. Note: nowhere in these requirements is prior OR required. But I can understand why someone would like to see prior OR, I personally don't think of that s a reson to oppose someones accredidation request, but I respect your decision fully.--Ryan524 - (talk) 13:24, 30 April 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 successful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Zachary

edit
Name: Zachary Hauri
Location: Richfield, Minnesota (just a stone's throw away from Minneapolis)
Areas of interest: Sports, ice hockey and baseball mostly
Reason: I want to make my NHL news reports more than just scoring summaries and stuff I looked up on stat sheets. Accreditation is something I've thought about for a while now. The NHL Stanley Cup playoffs are coming soon, and this would be a great opportunity for Wikinews to have original reporting about the playoffs, that is, if my local team doesn't get knocked out of a playoff spot ;). MLB season is right around the corner too.
Accomplishments: Article List, mostly consisting of the NHL news, a few about Major League Baseball, an National Basketball Association trade, and a few articles about non-sports subjects.
Contact information: Email (via form), email address zach@zachhauri.com
User ID: 13150
Applied on: 20:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments and questions

edit

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 successful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

WNewsReporter

edit
Name: Joseph Ford
Location: Marion County, Florida
Areas of interest: Politics, Culture and entertainment
Reason: I want to become an accredited reporter so I can serve the Wikinews community better. That's it. Wikinews is probably one of the greatest websites I've ever visited. Here, ordinary people have the power to become established journalists. A local city council meeting can get the same coverage as the impeachment of a president. Every story is put on an equal playing field, no bias. That's what I find amazing about this website and why I'm happy to write for it.
Accomplishments:
Contact information: homevideopictures@gmail.com
User ID: 19423
Applied on: March 1, 2008

Comments and Questions

edit

Marion County. It's the southernomst county in North Central Florida. --WNewsReporter - (talk) 08:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • So the Ocala area. You are in a good position to do some traveling for reporting, since you're near Tampa, Orlando and Gainesville. It's very advantageous! TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 09:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Not strictly relevant to this request but could you consider creating a user page to tell other users a little about yourself such as a rough idea of your location, what other (if any) Wikimedia Foundation projects you are active on, your interests, etc. I don't like seeing red links. Cheers. Adambro - (talk) 09:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right. I'll do that today. --WNewsReporter - (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page created. I know it's a bit short, but it's a start. --WNewsReporter - (talk) 17:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • How do you feel about the idea of going into the real world and acting as a freelance journalist?

I look forward to it. I want to, above all, get information out to the masses from an unbiased point of view. --WNewsReporter - (talk) 22:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do you have anything like a camera or something, which could also be used to verify your OR work?
--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do. I have a camcorder as well. --WNewsReporter - (talk) 22:44, 3 March 2008 (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 failed. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Jiuguang Wang

edit
Name: Jiuguang Wang
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, United States
Areas of interest: Mainly on the English Wikipedia, related to fields of science and engineering, particularly robotics and systems sciences. Also notable scientists and engineers in these fields.
Accomplishments: I have started over 100 articles on the English Wikipedia, categorized here. I'm also a member of WikiProject Robotics and have contributed to most of the project's "Did you know..." item, listed here.
Reason:
I'm currently a graduate student at the Georgia Institute of Technology, doing research on robotics. As a graduate student, I'm in a unique position to attend various conferences and workshops to present my research, and I'd like to use these opportunities to improve the related articles on Wikipedia. Specifically, this would involve coverage on conference exhibitions like this, competitions like RoboCup 2008, and interviews with notable researchers in the field.
The coverage on robotics and related fields (at least on the English Wikipedia) is currently in a state of disarray - take the biographies of notable researchers, for example: most of the best known researchers like this have extremely short articles due to a lack of information, and most of them (living) do not even have a freely available photograph. Arthur E. Bryson, the father of optimal control, who still regularly attends conferences, have nearly zero information on the web except for his publications. This situation can simply be rectified by having a single editor in the field with the resources, expertise, and dedication to improve these articles.
Finally, there's the question of the need for accreditation. While it is true that I do not necessarily need accreditation for entry into these conferences, accreditation does provide validation of my role to the conference organizers or the subjects I interview. As a bare minimum, I think it is appropriate for them to check my affiliations with Wikipedia, and I imagine that there are also things a journalist can do that a regular attendee cannot.
As a side note, my lack of activity here on Wikinews will most definitely raise a few opposes - I just want to reprint the accreditation policy items here:
  • Being an established Wikinews editor (or a contributor to another Wikimedia Foundation project) for several weeks
  • Having started several articles on Wikinews or another project
  • Commitment to NPOV as shown by edits and initial text
Contact information: j.w@gatech.edu
User ID: 21832
Applied on: 17:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

edit

This isn't going to raise a few opposes. Nobody will support it. Why? Your interest is in breaking Wikipedia policy and carrying out original research. You make not one suggestion to contribute here on Wikinews. Accreditation has been made available to people from non-English Wikinews projects, but never to one of the other projects. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:23, 21 July 2008 (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 successful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Iceflow

edit
Name: Thorsteinn A. Malmjursson
Location: Ely, Cambridgeshire, UK (Can cover within 70 Mile Radius, Cambridge, Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Peterborough, London)
Areas of interest: General interest stories, Entertainment, Sci-Tech
Reason: In recent times, there have been some fairly major news stories in East Anglia, such as the Soham Murders, The Norfolk Farmer who shot a burglar and was jailed, and various general interest work such as Drugs raids, Hollywood film shoots and other public interest material. I would like to be able to be in the front line to be able to break stories like this to WN, instead of relying on what I have seen and heard. Accreditation would give me the ability to be publicly recognised and get interviews with people who would not normally talk to an ordinary member of the public, and this would be an ideal opportunity to help WN build its coverage of local work.
Accomplishments: You can find all the stories I have so far broken under this Username, and under my SUL login, Iceflow, on my User page. I have been with Wikinews for a while now, and am a long established editor on Wikipedia, with a combined total of over 2300 edits, between vandal fighting, article translations, category setup, stubs and Wikiprojects. I contribute to the Stub sorting project and am active in votes and other namespace areas. My SUL is active on 37 projects in total.
Contact information: Email: hammer.of.thor@hotmail.com Cellphone: On Request. Voice over Broadband: +44 1353 770546 (BT) SKYPE: wikinews_tmalmjursson (Message first if its to do with Wikinews)
User ID: 12977
Applied on: 13:21, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit

Some optional questions: --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:23, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Q: What is your understanding of the WN:OR policy? Will a Wikinews press card make you a reporter? How should you present yourself to others in the real world? How will you explain what Wikinews is? How would you provide OR notes for the article you started in your sandbox?

    • Reponse:
  • My understanding of the OR policy is that it lays out the type of things you should be aware of, such as the preparation of notes, researching of facts and the way in which a Wikinews reporter should act and post their stories, quoting their sources, etc. I am also aware of the draft Code of Ethics which is in creation, stating the respect of the right to privacy, and such like.
  • A Wikinews Press Card will not make me a reporter. I am the reporter, the press card is an aid to the preparation of reports, and to assist in obtaining interviews and access to areas otherwise restricted to non-media.
  • I should present myself as a Freelance Reporter by name, and identify the fact that I am researching a particular news event which had occurred. If asked, I should show my WN credentials and identify the location where the report is to be posted.
  • I will explain that Wikinews is a free media site on the Internet, operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, and that the staff who report are a mixture of freelance journalists accredited by the organisation, and members of the general public who add news stories to the site as they come to light.
  • OR Notes would be provided by making written notes of what I had seen, who I had spoken to, and by the recording of audio notes to Digital Voice Recorder, and noting any quotes direct from people related to the OR, and also keeping records of their names, job and connection to the story, along with a respect for the right to privacy if requested. Any audio quotes and photographs would be dealt with by way of a media release form, if an audio quote or photograph was to be uploaded to commons or WN.
  • Having the interviewee sign a form on which they consent to my using and storing the audio clips / photographs and consenting to their presence/usage. If I am going to go by the book, I am going by the book. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 16:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't know if that is appropriate. If you introduce yourself as a citizen reporter and you say you want to interview them, that is enough consent. A person has personality rights over pictures in which they can be seen, but they don't have to sign a form for you to use the pictures or upload them. Moreover, the legal value of such a form is probably debatable. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is true, Steven, but in this area at least, some of the local and county councils are very very hot on photography at certain events for example: If you take a photograph for media or press at something like a school where an event is happening, and a child appears in the image, you must obtain parental consent before using the image. w:Cambridgeshire County Council are particularly stringent with this, and they are my county council. That is why I considered the use of a Media release to aid this process. Just something to say "I <state your name> consent to my(self/child) appearing in photographs to be used for publication." and have them sign it. Legally binding, maybe not... peace of mind, absolutely. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 23:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Q: Do you have any journalistic experience? Do you have any hardware that might assist in reporting, e.g. a pen, paper, camera, dictaphone, spare time, ...

    • Response
  • I have no prior public journalism experience, although I did work on my school newspaper when I was 14. As for equipment I own, I have the following at my disposal: Pens, Pencils, Notepads and Folders, An 8MP digital camera capable of shooting stills and video, Digital Voice recorder (up to 12 hours storage space), standard dictaphone, PC with Full office suite including DTP and layout software.
  • As for spare time, I currently have that crawling out of my ears in bucketloads!


Q: How good is your Dutch and where did you learn it? Why doesn't your userpage on Wikinews reflect your babelboxes on User:Iceflow?

    • Response
  • My dutch is pretty basic, like I stated on my Userpage here, it is for politeness only. Numbers, Colours, Greetings, Directions, ordering food and drink, shopping etc. It is by no means fluent.

I believe in something very few people here (in Britain) do. I don't automatically expect the whole world to speak English just because I do. If I go somewhere else, I take the time to learn some of their language, just like someone coming here tries to learn English. As for where I learned, it was mostly through communication with staff at Radio Nederland Wereldomroep, from when I used to monitor Shortwave for them.

  • My userpage simply doesn't reflect my Wikipedia babel because I was unsure of the process of adding babel boxes here. People had informed me that certain things only work in certain places. I will look into expanding the userpage to reflect language usage and capability.
  • Sheer clutter, that's all, Steven. If I take some of the (none essential) userboxes off my page, then it will clean up, and I will have more room to bring them into line with my language capabilities. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 00:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Q: Are you planning to add your contributions as a reporter to other projects like Wikipedia, Commons, etc? How do you divide your time between projects?

    • Response
  • I would look to possibly using images for Wikipedia, for example, if the image was relevant to the article, or adding detail gained through reporting for WN to assist with the expansion and correction of articles, should there be a need for this. Photographs and audio notes would be added to Commons for future review should there be a need to verify the facts of a published story.
  • I divide my time roughly 60/40 between WP and WN, since I do a lot of anti vandalism work on WP, but devote as much time as possible to keeping up with both projects. Should I be accredited, I would resolve to reduce my workload with WP and come to WN as my home site.

I hope these answers prove useful in the process of accreditation, and thank you warmly for asking such searching questions.

Comments

edit
Thank you for the comment, cirt. To the best of my understanding, once an account has made edits, there are issues in merging it. Since Iceflow and this, my main account both have edits, it will cause grief to merge them. If it is possible, I would welcome this to be done. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 04:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, quite understandable, no prob. Cirt (talk) 12:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

edit
You are applying a catch-22 that has never before been used. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I find it hard to believe that it has never before been used. There's nothing stopping the user contributing some OR without being accredited. Anonymous101talk 15:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I may, I would like to come back against this statement, Anonymous101 - The only reason I have never done any OR for Wikinews is that I was under the impression that I was supposed to be accredited prior to carrying out this kind of work. It's not that I have never been bothered to do any or anything like that, simply that I didn't realise that I was able to! Hope this helps. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 16:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the three or so years I have been involved in Wikinews I am not aware of anyone objecting to an accreditation request on the basis of no prior OR work. --Brian McNeil / talk 16:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As a sidenote I have done some OR and not been accredited - either by working directly with one or more users that are accredited, mailing the list with my OR notes and verification, or posting information about the original material used either in the Sources section of the article and/or on the talkpage - so it is not necessarily a Catch-22. Cirt (talk) 20:34, 31 July 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 successful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Calebrw

edit
Name: Caleb Williams
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
Areas of interest: Local, Sports, some politics
Reason: I hope to cover local events, such as the upcoming 2008 RNC. I would also like to keep my journalism skills current through continual use. In addition to my work on WikiNews, I account on 65 projects via SUL (most of those are for adding WikiCommons pictures, though I only do a little bit of that) with primary use of Wikipedia and WikiCommons. I have 2,400 edits on Wikimedia, many dealing with work for WikiProject schools, where I am an "Experienced Assessor."
Accomplishments: I have only been writing for a few days, but I have started 12 full articles and a few briefs. I have also contributed to several other articles. Please see: User:Calebrw#Articles_I_wrote_.28or_started.29
In addition to WikiNews, I was the Photo Editor for my college newspaper for two years. I have experience reporting, taking pictures, layout, advertising (you name it, I've done it for them). I do not have access to the articles offhand (except for a few hardcopies I've kept), but if required, I would be able to produce them the paper's digital archives.
I have access to digital camera, laptop, pen, paper. I'm used to taking notes and for stories.
Contact information: Available on request. All I would request is name, address, e-mail, cell, etc.
User ID: 22784
Applied on: 19:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit

How should you present yourself to others in the real world? Anonymous101talk 18:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I intent to impart myself in the most professional manner possible, by dressing nicely, using polite speech and keeping an eye towards inoffensive actions (such as pressing too hard, or demanding information.) When approaching potential sources to ask questions, I will explain why am there, who I am (I'm an independent journalist covering XYZ topic with the intent of publishing my story on Wikinews, etc.)

WouldWhat should go in OR notes? Anonymous101talk 18:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my understanding of the OR policies, I intend to keep a comprehensive list of notes including, the setting and information along those lines (Packed gymnasium in suburban Detroit, Mayor ABC was speaking to the DEF group.) as well as all other notes I take (Verbatim quotes, paraphrases), BG information, source names and information, etc. Also, I would upload the information, either directly to the collaboration, or via word document or PDF.
I hope that I have answers your questions thoroughly, but if you wish me to elaborate, please ask. —Calebrw (talk) 19:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Iceflow:
Even professional journalists get blown off sometimes when asking for interviews. Are you good at handling rejection/disappointment? Would you try other methods of obtaining an interview if it was vital that you got one? Iceflow (talk) 08:14, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would consider myself fairly persistent with interviews. I've had to interview quite a few people in my previous job as photo editor. You can't always get them, but you have to try as hard as you can, especially when they are important. I've done, phone, face-to-face and e-mail interviews so I'm used to different methods. Disappointment in this sense isn't a big deal, per above. Hope that answers your question. —Calebrw (talk) 23:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question from The Mind's Eye:

My question is is why exactly do you want to be accredited. Your answer won't effect my support, but I was just curious. The Mind's Eye (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An excellent question and one I asked myself. As someone interested in visual reporting (photojournalism), I have had the opportunity to cover a wide variety of events. It's something I enjoy and I would like it to remain in my life. While I wouldn't be "working for WikiNews," it would lend some credibility to my reporting, especially with large events, national-level sports, and other events. As mentioned previously, the 2008 Republican National Convention is something I'd like to cover. The rebuilding of the I35 bridge in Minneapolis, etc. I hope this answers your question. —Calebrw (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

edit

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 successful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

ShakataGaNai

edit
Name: Jon Davis
Location: San Francisco Bay Area, California / Lake Tahoe, NV
Areas of interest: Photography - Pop culture, Science, Technology, Local news (Plus Generic stock images)
Reason: I'm primarily a photographer, and I'd like to put my hobby to use helping Wikinews. My dream goal is to make sure 100% of articles have pictures. I obviously wont be able to have on the spot pictures for everything, but maybe I could build up the stock images a bit more. Also, I might be able to provide some help for local articles with on the spot "reporting"/information - but I'll admit I'm not a good writer.
Accomplishments: Started: Potential Wikia mass exodus. A number of images on Commons (over 600) including: Majority of Category:Maker Faire 2008, Majority of Category:RecentChangesCamp 2008, All of the November images in Category:Wikimedia meetups in San Francisco
Contact information: wikikonsoletek.com; ShakataGaNai on irc.freenode.net; XMPP: shakataganai@jabber.org; Phone on request
User ID: 22614
Applied on: 07:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit

Question from Iceflow: As someone who is primarily a photographer, do you think you would ever concentrate more on the photographs than on the assembly of the story itself? If not, please explain how you would balance the use of photographs against written text in your work. Iceflow (talk) 08:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm honestly not sure how to answer you, so if I got this wrong, feel free to steer me in the right course: As I've said before I'm not a good writer. Even still, a bunch of pictures with no words... doesn't do anyone much good. So if I'm covering a local event, I'll try my best to at least write enough useful content that someone else can turn it into a proper article. Otherwise the idea of "photo essays" is worth investigating, and at least there I have to make sure that every image has a proper (And decent) caption. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 17:40, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Chris Mann: Do you have any plans to use accreditation in the near future, such as an upcoming event you plan to attend? Chris Mann (Say hi!|Stalk me!) 12:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

edit

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 successful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

PatrickFlaherty (talk · contribs)

edit
Name: Patrick Flaherty
Location: Washington, DC.
Areas of interest: Economics, Politics, and international trade. I would probably focus a fair amount on the WTO, World Bank, and IMF.
Reason: As part of my job, I attend a lot of events and I always think, well this would make an interesting article. Since I'm located in DC, I can also attend congressional hearings and other events and write up a good description of the event if it's newsworthy. If I receive accreditation, I would request accredited by the WTO, World Bank, and IMF as to receive press material and write up articles based on that.
Accomplishments: Bush addresses nation on economic crisis; Congress debates bailout

Economic opportunities for women still lagging: World Bank and OECD Doha round negotiations might restart in a matter of weeks, IMF and EU approve aid for Georgia, Lehman Brothers files for bankruptcy, Bank of America attempts takeover of Merrill Lynch, Work on Lehman Brothers’ rescue to continue over weekend, World Bank says more people are poor, but fewer are in extreme poverty

Contact information: patrickflahertydc@gmail.com. Phone on request
User ID: 23,647
Applied on: 20:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Questions

edit
42 and to serve Wikinews, of course. I also believe that if you choose to go though life having fun, then you will probably live a very good life. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 12:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mikhail Gorbachev and my question to him would be; Has Russia changed for the better since the collapse of the USSR? --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 19:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • My question, Patrick, is this: Having stated your main areas of interest, how do you feel you would cope operating outside these areas? Are there any other subjects or areas of reporting which you feel you could positively contribute to? Iceflow (talk) 03:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I think I can. I have a wide range of knowledge on issues. I travel for my job a fair amount to Africa, Europe, and Asia and as a result, I know the politics and other cultural issues in these areas. This being said, there are some areas such as wresting and some scientific areas that I have just about no knowledge of. Also, I will avoid any areas that I have a conflict of interest in. Hope this answers your question. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 03:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here's the situation: You want a small selection of grapes from the office kitchen, you go to rip of a branch but it is too difficult. You borrow a knife from a co-worker and try to cut off the branch - but the knife appears dull. How do you test the sharpness of the knife? --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 03:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    First off, I would stop thinking why my co-worker had a knife with them. Then I would start thinking about if I want to appear macho by running the knife across my arm to see if it cuts hair or appear a little less macho by trying to peel the grape. Is there an correct answer to this question? --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 04:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

edit

Votes

edit
I understand that, ShakataGaNai, but it clearly shows him adding the publish tag at a stage when the article had not been reviewed, and then he subsequently went and reviewed it himself after doing most of the work on it. That shows he needs to understand the process a bit more - you don't review articles where you have significantly contributed to them. Iceflow (talk) 17:48, 29 September 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 successful. Please do not add further votes or comments to this request.

Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs)

edit

Comments/Questions

edit
  • Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, because although most attention is flung at the leaders of a handful of Western powers, plus the most controversial African ones, and yet he is just as important on the world stage - his country is the heart of armed conflict between militaries and insurgents, and he has nuclear weapons. The things to ask would be about his vision for the country (obviously), how he intends to reconstruct the nation when and if insurgency is pushed out, and what measures he intends to take to ensure the safety of civilians since the recent bombing in Islamabad has demonstrated work needs done in that area. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 19:45, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your flight leaves next Sunday. Remember the tape recorder. :-P --Brian McNeil / talk 20:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should my request be successful, I'd like to request my initials are used to name my @wikinewsie.org email address (as in IM@wikinewsie.org) rather than my full name; obviously that's readily availible anyway to folk it is used to contact and from checking Wikinewsie itself. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 09:19, 11 October 2008 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Accreditation_requests/Archive_2&oldid=4639069"