Wikinews:IRC workshop/March 30, 2011

[17:58] -->|    Mattisse (185c08c2@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #wikinews-workshop
[17:58] <Amgine>        Bonjour Mattisse
[18:00] -->|    Avic (~Avicennas@wikipedia/Avicennasis) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:00] <bawolff>       Hello
[18:00] <Avic>  Hi. :)
[18:01] <B-R-S> Hi Avic
[18:02] * bawolff       pings Tempo_away
[18:02] <bawolff>       !time utc
[18:02] * bawolff       mutters about what a good bot
[18:03] <B-R-S> And who's bot is it? ;)
[18:03] <bawolff>       Zach's bot ;)
[18:03] <bawolff>       does [[linking]] work?
[18:04] <bawolff>       oh well, bots kind of useless anyhow
[18:04] <Dendodge>      B-R-S: *whose
[18:04] <bawolff>       So folks, its 21:00 UTC, people have shown up, shall we start?
[18:04] <B-R-S> <sticks tongue out defiantly>
[18:05] ===     Bleep <~goblins@wikimedia/bluegoblin7> â..Bluegoblin7 of all Wikimedia wikisâ..
[18:05] ===     Bleep: member of #wikinews-workshop, #wikinews-en, and #wikinews
[18:05] ===     Bleep: attached to â..Irvine, CA, USAâ..
[18:05] ===     Bleep is logged in as Bluegoblin7
[18:05] ---     End of WHOIS information for Bleep.
[18:06] =-=     ChanServ has changed the topic to â..Welcome to the Wikinews Workshop! Everyone is welcome to make and discuss suggestions for improving Wikinews here. Please be respectful of others at all times. | This channel is publicly logged. | Meeting has now started. | Please use #wikinews-en for off-topic conversationâ..
[18:06] |<--    Amgine has left freenode (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[18:06] <bawolff>       So Wikinews (where oh where is tempo)
[18:07] <bawolff>       There's been lots of discussion as of late regarding, etiquite related policies, and the future of peer review
[18:07] <Dendodge>      This would be easier with an agenda...
[18:07] <bawolff>       Shall we start with ettiquite related policies?
[18:07] <B-R-S> Seems reasonable
[18:08] <thewub>        agreed
[18:08] ===     Mattisse <185c08c2@gateway/web/freenode/ip.> â - http://â..
[18:08] ===     Mattisse: member of #wikinews-workshop
[18:08] ===     Mattisse: attached to â..Corvallis, OR, USAâ..
[18:08] ---     End of WHOIS information for Mattisse.
[18:09] <bawolff>       btw, just to check, can Mattisse here me?
[18:10] <Dendodge>      *hear
[18:10] <B-R-S> Okay. Where we're at right now as a discussion has developed originally as a tangent to revisit the age-old problem. A draft is on the table, located here:
[18:10] <B-R-S> Mattisse seems to be having chat trouble, based on on-wiki conversations :(
[18:11] <B-R-S> (at some point we may like to discuss her proposed reviewing policy)
[18:11] <bawolff>       My personal opinion is that Tempo's policy doesn't say all that much that hasn't been said before
[18:12] *ChanServ*      Invalid parameters for ACCESS.
[18:12] *ChanServ*      Syntax: ACCESS <#channel> ADD|DEL|LIST [nick] [level]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      Entry Nickname/Host Flags
[18:12] *ChanServ*      ----- ---------------------- -----
[18:12] *ChanServ*      1 Tempodivalse +votsriRfAF [modified 22 hours, 9 minutes, 37 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      2 Mikemoral +votsrifA (super-op) [modified 20 hours, 24 minutes, 20 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      3 brianmc +votriA (operator) [modified 20 hours, 47 minutes, 13 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      4 Zuzak +votriA (operator) [modified 20 hours, 42 minutes, 35 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      5 BloodRedSandman +votriA (operator) [modified 20 hours, 40 minutes, 56 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      6 bawolff +votriA (operator) [modified 19 hours, 39 minutes, 7 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      7 C628 +votriA (operator) [modified 19 hours, 38 minutes, 39 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      8 Amgine +votriA (operator) [modified 18 hours, 8 minutes, 51 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      9 Cirt +votriA (operator) [modified 1 hour, 30 minutes, 4 seconds ago]
[18:12] *ChanServ*      ----- ---------------------- -----
[18:12] *ChanServ*      End of #wikinews-workshop FLAGS listing.
[18:13] <B-R-S> I fear the issue of defining will, as usual, shut that idea off.
[18:13] <bawolff>       I don't think the problem is coming up with a policy saying be nice, more its finding a way to enforce said policy
[18:13] <B-R-S> That's about right; Pi Zero's determined to find a non-block solution
[18:13] <B-R-S> I wish him luck
[18:14] -->|    Mattise ( has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:14] <bawolff>       Hi Mattis
[18:14] <B-R-S> Hi Mattisse. :)
[18:14] <Mattise>       Hi
[18:15] <thewub>        Hi Mattise
[18:15] <Mattise>       Hi to everyone
[18:15] <bawolff>       Mattise: Did you see the conversation that was happening before you joined?
[18:15] <B-R-S> yay! Technical problems overcome
[18:16] <Mattise>       Yes, I saw it on a web page but there was no way for me to enter in there.
[18:16] <bawolff>       ok
[18:17] <bawolff>       before I forget, barking fish wanted it noted:
[18:17] <bawolff>       [23:19] <BarkingFish> Filing note here that I will be unable to attend the meeting set for this time, as I am out tonight to attend a Prison Officers Union meeting. Noting my apologies for the absence.
[18:18] <B-R-S> Okay, I'm going to be AFK for a bit. I'll be back before the meeting's out, so feel free to ping questions etc at me if you have any for me specifically and I'll answer on my return.
[18:18] <bawolff>       So in my experiance, the be nice or block approach to niceness policies tends not work
[18:19] <bawolff>       Using blocks as any form of punishment tends not to work. They're really only effective against vandals whom we don't want to edit the site ever again
[18:20] <Dendodge>      We could make their articles wait in the queue for hours without a reviewâ..oh, wait, that happens to everyone! Silly me!
[18:21] <Mattise>       Whose articles? The vandals?
[18:22] <thewub>        Dendodge: lol
[18:22] <bawolff>       I think he meant any contributor deemed not to be nice
[18:22] <thewub>        I agree that blocks aren't the best solution. We need to foster a different atmosphere somehow though
[18:22] -->|    Amgine_ (~Amgine@ has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:22] |<--    Amgine_ has left freenode (Changing host)
[18:22] -->|    Amgine_ (~Amgine@wikinews/Amgine) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:22] <Mattise>       Deemed by whom?
[18:22] <thewub>        It amazes me that some users can't seem to acknowledge that incivility is harmful
[18:22] <bawolff>       I don't think dendodge's suggestion was serious
[18:23] <Dendodge>      It wasn't. It was satirical.
[18:23] <Dendodge>      Kind of on-topic, I thought, but I'll shut up if you disagree.
[18:25] <Mattise>       Well, my nickname is Mattisse but I accidentally entered it as Mattise the first time. I think I will have to shut down the whole chat to make the change. Then I would lose all that has been said so far.
[18:25] <bawolff>       Mattise you can change your nickname
[18:25] <bawolff>       by doing
[18:25] <bawolff>       /nick new name
[18:26] <Mattise>       I have done that. But it only takes effect if I close chat. Then I would lose the preceding conversation, I think.
[18:26] <bawolff>       Also the contents of this chat are going to be posted on wiki afterwards
[18:26] =-=     YOU are now known as itShouldTakeAffe
[18:26] =-=     YOU are now known as bawolff
[18:26] <bawolff>       It should take affect immediatly
[18:26] <Amgine_>       No worries: I don't think the nick is as important as knowing who is whom.
[18:27] <bawolff>       yes
[18:27] <Mattise>       That's great but I wouldn't being participating then.
[18:28] -->|    phearson (4a217823@wikipedia/phearson) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:28] <phearson>      Hello
[18:29] <Mattise>       What is the nick command? The place on the web cat that says change nickname only carries through with the change if I close web chat and then restart it.
[18:29] <phearson>      /nick
[18:29] |<--    Tempo_away has left freenode (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
[18:29] <bawolff>       Mattise, in any case we know who you are, thats what is important in the end
[18:30] <Mattise>       OK , I tried the /nick command but, as you can see, it did not work. I would have to shut down chat and restart it to have the name change take effect.
[18:31] ===     Mattise <> â..New Now Know Howâ..
[18:31] ===     Mattise: member of #wikinews-workshop
[18:31] ===     Mattise: attached to â..Stockholm, Swedenâ..
[18:31] ---     End of WHOIS information for Mattise.
[18:32] <bawolff>       Mattise: since you're using chatzilla, you know how right beside (to the right) of the box where you type stuff, there is a box containing your name. If you click on that, there should be a drop down with an option to change name
[18:32] -->|    brianmc-phone (~brianmc@wikinews/brianmc) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:32] <Mattise>       I acknowledge that incivility is harmful.
[18:32] <thewub>        sigh, IRC is really not new user friendly is it?
[18:32] <bawolff>       (but really, it doesn't matter)
[18:32] <bawolff>       hi brianmc-phone
[18:32] <brianmc-phone> Nowhere near as bad as nntp://
[18:32] <Amgine_>       <points @ topic>
[18:33] <bawolff>       So brianmc-phone I imagine has some interesting thoughts on the relative harmfulness of civility?
[18:33] <Mattise>       Yes, there is a drop down box for changing my name. However, the name change only takes effect if I close web chat and then restart it. I would lose the previous conversation if I did that.
[18:33] <brianmc-phone> Which, curiously, doesn't cite an author.
[18:34] <brianmc-phone> Yes, but many of my thoughts on civility are generally considered deeply offensive.
[18:34] <Mattise>       Isn't one of the problems that incivility is not defined? Different users have different definitions.
[18:35] <phearson>      Mattise: what IRC cleint are you using?
[18:35] <bawolff>       Do you really think its possible to make a definition
[18:35] ===     CTCP version reply â..ChatZilla [Firefox 4.0/20110318052756]â.. from Mattise
[18:35] <bawolff>       phearson: he's using chatzilla
[18:36] <phearson>      thats strange
[18:36] <bawolff>       what is civility depends a lot on context
[18:36] <Mattise>       My view, which seems to be supported by few people, is that wiki projects are work places and work place civility should pertain.
[18:36] <Amgine_>       Incivility is contextual, and so is effectively undefinable.
[18:36] <brianmc-phone> Let me start with this, relatively inoffensive, one: Setting up an IRC channel, pushing for discussion in said, then announcing you can't attend is offensive.
[18:36] <phearson>      Ive used chatzilla in the past, and its always changed for me.
[18:37] <Mattise>       Well, what can I say? It doesn't for me.
[18:37] <bawolff>       brianmc-phone: Well that may be true, Tempo not being here is a bit off-topic...
[18:38] <thewub>        Mattise: there appears to be a "Mattisse" in channel as well. Do you still have the browser chat open?
[18:38] <brianmc-phone> I qas discussing whether or not this channel, and discussion herein, might be productive less than 48hrs ago. Where is the proposer who dumped us in here for an 'online cage fight'?
[18:39] <Amgine_>       Brianmc-phone: fruitless line of discussion.
[18:39] -->|    ashershow1 (43541b0e@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:39] <ashershow1>    hey guys
[18:39] <thewub>        Hi ashershow1 :)
[18:39] <bawolff>       Hi ashershow1
[18:39] <ashershow1>    wub!
[18:39] <ashershow1>    glad to see you back :)
[18:40] <ashershow1>    so what's the topic?
[18:40] -->|    AutisticPsycho ( has joined #wikinews-workshop
[18:40] <Mattise>       My specific problem, as everyone knows, took place in the context of a review. I think if there were clear guidelines for what should be discussed in a review, it would have helped.
[18:41] <brianmc-phone> Amgine_, I disagree that highlighting apparently being set up to fail is unproductive.
[18:42] <Mattise>       I don't still have the web page open
[18:42] <bawolff>       The issue at hand is Wikinews. Not if this chat is a good/bad idea.
[18:42] <ashershow1>    I think the review process should be confined to just plagiarism and fact-checking review. thoughts?
[18:42] <bawolff>       I'd consider those the hard parts
[18:43] <bawolff>       plagerism and fact-cheking takes 99.9% of the time
[18:43] <brianmc-phone> Fair enough. Then moving on from this being 'sprung on everyone', I'd highlight geoff's submission and the teain wreck that was.
[18:43] <bawolff>       The rest of it is generally easy in my mind
[18:43] <thewub>        Yeah, that's how I remember it too
[18:44] <Mattise>       Agree, and such things as spelling, grammar, bad phrasing, etc. The article should be presentable as in a newspaper.
[18:44] <brianmc-phone> First off, submission for review isn't an appeal for assistance.
[18:45] <ashershow1>    spelling, grammar, and bad phrasing can all be fixed after the article is published
[18:45] <brianmc-phone> No.
[18:45] <bawolff>       Everything can be fixed after an article is published for some sense of fixed
[18:45] <Mattise>       No, but if the article has spelling, dramatical errors and is badly worded, it should not be passed.
[18:46] <brianmc-phone> But not as archived by google, or viewed by all social media followers
[18:46] <Amgine_>       <nods> An article should meet minimal English.
[18:46] <thewub>        or if minor, they can be fixed by the reviewer of course
[18:46] <Mattise>       Tweaks can be made after publication, but I think it should be basically presentable at the time of publication.
[18:46] <brianmc-phone> Yes, thewub
[18:46] <Amgine_>       Someone should be able to look at it and understand it is a news story.
[18:47] <brianmc-phone> My standards are probably too high...
[18:47] <Amgine_>       BUT: I don't think an article should be unduly delayed, either. It can always be unpublished, too.
[18:47] <ashershow1>    yes, obviously the article should be generally well-written, but I find a lot of my reviewing time is spent rewording and correcting grammar
[18:47] <Amgine_>       Oh, hey, bawolff... what's the status of 21919?
[18:48] <brianmc-phone> If you're not thinking GA equivalent of WP, you're asking for a fail from a time-pressed reviewer
[18:48] <bawolff>       Its pending further review/comments from somebody else
[18:48] <Mattise>       But I think emotional reactions, lectures on article writing, what an "editor" is in the real world are out of place
[18:48] <brianmc-phone> Eh?
[18:48] <Amgine_>       Bawolff: 28 hours and brion is on payroll.
[18:49] <Mattise>       That is how I experienced the review I am referring to. I haven't had problems with other reviews.
[18:49] <Amgine_>       brianmc-phone: Bawolff and I are talking about getting the ability to "unpublish" on Google News for en.WN.
[18:50] <brianmc-phone> GNSM?
[18:50] <Amgine_>       <nods>
[18:50] <bawolff>       Mattise, lectures may not be appropriate (I'm not familar with the specific example, but saying in general), but surely if someone fails an article, you'd want them to tell you why
[18:50] * bawolff       is uncertain if GNSM would actually allow unpublish
[18:50] <brianmc-phone> I fully trust Brion to kick ass and sort that.
[18:51] <thewub>        Even if we had the option to unpublish, it's not something I'd like to see being used often
[18:51] <brianmc-phone> Agreed.
[18:52] <Mattise>       Anyway, because I was confused and kept asking for clarification, and because the review veered into discussion of whether I had a "different" idea of what an editor was (I was told that I seemed to think a wikinews editor was like a real world editor, I was threatened with a block for a personal attack. I am still not clear about the personal attack part.
[18:53] <brianmc-phone> Pardon the phrasing, but less conflict is easily achievable if less shit is thrown at the reviewer wall to see what sticks. Hence my GA comment.
[18:53] <Amgine_>       Bawolff: It does, but there is a delay period.
[18:54] <brianmc-phone> I'm unfamiliar in detail with Mattisse's issue. So don't take my remarks as on such.
[18:55] <bawolff>       Amgine_: how exactly
[18:55] <bawolff>       the docs if i recall said that anything thats on the list gets published, and things are recomended to stay on the list for at most two days (but i intpreted that as saying could be less). I don't recall anything about unpublishing
[18:56] <Amgine_>       Google agrees to *only* list those articles currently in the news site map. Which allows some news sources to only list the past X hours, others to list the past X days.
[18:56] <Amgine_>       They don't cache the site map's previous contents.
[18:56] <brianmc-phone> Has everyone in here, and relatively new, read the essay on contributing that uses a hitchhiker's guide story as an example?
[18:57] <AutisticPsycho>        No.
[18:57] <Dendodge>      Yes
[18:57] <Amgine_>       No
[18:57] <AutisticPsycho>        And I've been here 6 years
[18:57] <bawolff>       possibly, but certainly not recently enough i remember the ancedotes in it
[18:57] <Dendodge>      I didn't get the joke when I first got here, then I read H2G2 and was like, "Oh, I recognise this from Wikinews!" :P
[18:57] <thewub>        I glanced at it tonight actually :)
[18:57] <brianmc-phone> Lol.
[18:58] <Mattise>       I asked for specific criticisms instead of general ones. I was told I was being unreasonable and given lectures on article writing it was suggested that I consult BBC and Al Jezeera first. Well, I had already consulted those sources. These comments and others, that the article was "poetic POV" when the reviewer had not consulted the sources. I think before the third "fail" he did consult them.
[18:58] <Amgine_>       Mattise: How many articles have you had published?
[18:58] <Mattise>       I wish those review pages had not been deleted so I could see what happened.
[18:59] <Amgine_>       They can be recovered. How many articles have you had published?
[18:59] <AutisticPsycho>        Yes.
[18:59] <AutisticPsycho>        Deleted does not mean gone permeantly.
[18:59] <Mattise>       I have published 34 and 1/2 articles (I had to cut/paste one of my articles into another, so that is the 1/2)
[18:59] <AutisticPsycho>        Everything is stored... forever.
[19:00] <AutisticPsycho>        DUN DUN DUN
[19:00] <brianmc-phone> In a server far, far away...
[19:00] <thewub>        Mattise raises a good point though. We have useful feedback in the review templates/article talk, and then it gets deleted. Should make a point of at least copying to the user's talk page
[19:01] <Amgine_>       Mattise: so, this one article you've had trouble with accounts for 3% of the articles you have done, roughly. How important is this one event to your en.WN experience?
[19:01] <AutisticPsycho>        WTF?
[19:01] * AutisticPsycho        facepalms
[19:01] <AutisticPsycho>        brb
[19:01] <AutisticPsycho>        fixing something
[19:02] <Mattise>       Well, I am not interested in doing bad things. But I have never experienced a review like that one. The reviewer seemed overly involved to me, and overly emotional. I admit I did not take this well.
[19:03] <AutisticPsycho>        Who was said reviewer
[19:03] <bawolff>       Mattise, is [[Talk:Libyan leader says to nation: 'I will die a martyr']] the page in question
[19:03] <brianmc-phone> I've fought over a single word...
[19:03] <Amgine_>       <nods> However, do you admit that you have taken this one event, a relatively small amount of your experience, and focused on it to the exclusion of the 97% of your experience which has been without issues?
[19:03] <Mattise>       But if I can be offered constructive criticism regarding that review, and shown where I went wrong, I would welcome it.
[19:03] * AutisticPsycho        sharpens and polishes banhammer
[19:03] * AutisticPsycho        grins evily
[19:03] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: I believe it was pi zero who Mattise got in a disagreement with (?)
[19:04] <AutisticPsycho>        Ah.
[19:04] <Amgine_>       No, I think xe had an issue with Pi Zero, which led to an issue with BarkingFish.
[19:04] -->|    Nemo_bis (~Nemo_bis@wikimedia/Nemo-bis) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:04] <AutisticPsycho>        Speaking of issues.
[19:04] <Amgine_>       <waves @ Nemo_bis>
[19:04] <bawolff>       well yes, but BarkingFish was not the reviewer of said article if i recall
[19:05] <AutisticPsycho>        What's everyone's take on my little incident with Nascar?
[19:05] <Nemo_bis>      hi Amgine_
[19:05] <brianmc-phone> One point has to be clear:
[19:05] <brianmc-phone> News automatically carries a risk of contributor conflict.
[19:05] <Mattise>       I have read over the talk page conversations in the reviewers archives, where I tried to express myself but I still don't quite understand what happened.
[19:05] <Amgine_>       Haven't seen it, AutisticPsycho.
[19:05] <bawolff>       Mattise, I remember reading some of that a while back. I think a large amount of that was miscommunication. I think both parties thought people were saying things different from what they actually were intending
[19:06] <bawolff>       [[WN:WYSINYM]] and all (wanted to use that abbreviation at least once)
[19:06] <Amgine_>       Mattise: In my experiences on en.WN mis-communication is nearly always the issue.
[19:06] <AutisticPsycho>
[19:06] <AutisticPsycho>        My take and all.
[19:07] <AutisticPsycho>        More or less... I was on IRC.
[19:07] <Amgine_>       <looks>
[19:07] <AutisticPsycho>        Nascar was being a bit rude.
[19:07] <Amgine_>       bawolff: wth?
[19:07] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: personally I would have preferred that any action taken against Nascar for that stayed in irc (quieted or booted), but overall I don't think you were really out of line
[19:08] <AutisticPsycho>        Flooding spam from wikilinker... depsite requests to tell him to stop.
[19:08] <AutisticPsycho>        Yes.
[19:08] <bawolff>       Amgine_: WYSINYM - what you see is not what you mean - the article explains it perfectly ;)
[19:08] <AutisticPsycho>        It should have. I just wanted to knock him down a peg temporarily.
[19:08] <AutisticPsycho>        Apolgize for being an ass.
[19:08] <AutisticPsycho>        Making racist comments to diego.
[19:09] <Mattise>       My problem with that was how it happened. A few editors one evening decided on IRC that Nascar should be blocked. I thought such procedures should be transparent. I felt very bad for Nascar.
[19:09] <Amgine_>       bawolff: You forgot a letter.
[19:09] <AutisticPsycho>        And homophobic comments to someone else that caused a contributor to cry.
[19:09] <brianmc-phone> bawolff, I had that issue with text messages between myself and the woman I'm "courting"
[19:09] <AutisticPsycho>        Mattise: I never planned on blocking him.
[19:10] <AutisticPsycho>        I was going to remove his reviewing rights temporarily and have him apolgize to return them.
[19:10] <Mattise>       [[WN:WYSINYM]] - don't know what that is. Another disadvantage for newbies is most of the conversations are in jargon.
[19:10] <bawolff>       Mattise: sorry, should have had an extra W in there -
[19:10] <Amgine_>       Mattise: I was not in IRC at the time, or I would have acted to prevent it from escalating the way it did. In some respects I agree with you. However, I also have to say that *after events escalated* Nascar did xyurself considerable injury by baiting and instigating problems.
[19:11] <brianmc-phone> What you Say Is Not What Others Think You Mean...
[19:11] <thewub>        AutisticPsycho: I don't think anyone's defending his actions (I haven't seen the IRC logs at all, so wouldn't want to comment). But as I said in your Reconf request, rights changes really ought to be discussed on wiki except in the most extreme cases
[19:11] <bawolff>       Mattise: and further more, I made it up ten minutes ago, so you're not alone in not knowing what it means :)
[19:11] <Mattise>       WN:WYSINYM doesn't turn up in "search".
[19:11] <B-R-S> We shouldn't be using abbreviated links when we know the bot to link them isn't working, bawolff
[19:11] <bawolff>       Mattise: yes, I made a typo, extra W between N and Y
[19:12] <B-R-S> (I'm back, btw)
[19:12] <AutisticPsycho>        Yes.
[19:12] <AutisticPsycho>        Oh well.
[19:12] <AutisticPsycho>        Guess I won't apply for Oversight then.
[19:12] <AutisticPsycho>        :(
[19:12] >Wikilink2<     !sys say #wikinews-meeting is this thing on?
[19:12] <AutisticPsycho>        Anywho.
[19:12] <B-R-S> Nah, it was hardly major
[19:12] <B-R-S> Go apply, although maybe wait a few months to highlight how isolated it was
[19:12] <AutisticPsycho>        Yeah.
[19:13] <brianmc-phone> The fact we're having this discussion is positive.
[19:13] <Amgine_>       Mmm, no, I think it *was* fairly major. But we all know I'm the policy stickler.
[19:13] <thewub>        thewub: I'm not criticising you, I think we should just make it a general rule
[19:13] <phearson>      politics...
[19:13] <bawolff>       thewub: tab completion?
[19:13] <B-R-S> Now... what topic are we onto? Mattisse had some decent ideas for a hardening up of reviewer procedures on the Water Cooler
[19:13] <thewub>        oops, meant for AutisticPsycho !
[19:13] <Mattise>       What does it mean?
[19:13] <AutisticPsycho>        thewub: Ah.
[19:14] <Mattise>       WN:WYSINYM
[19:14] <AutisticPsycho>        How does everyone feel about the minor comestic changes that were made following the Japan quake and rebellion in Libya?
[19:14] <Amgine_>       Mattise:,_but_think_they_do
[19:14] <bawolff>       Mattise: just that people often misinterpret what you're saying to them
[19:14] <Amgine_>       It was a news article about a study which showed people often do not understand e-mails which are sent to them.
[19:14] <Amgine_>       <fuzheado! that takes me back...>
[19:15] <brianmc-phone> Heh.
[19:15] <Amgine_>       Anyway, where were we...
[19:16] <bawolff>       And most importantly, people when not understanding think that they actually do
[19:16] <B-R-S> AutisticPsycho: On the whole, I liked the banners. It had the feel of a rapidly responding organisation.
[19:16] <Mattise>       That is why policies and rules are needed. They may seem stifling, but how do you enact a procedure so that people have a common understanding of how things work?
[19:16] <brianmc-phone> In the study, holding the candlestick.
[19:16] <bawolff>       Not knowing is one thing, not knowing and thinking you know, is where stuff turns bad
[19:16] <Amgine_>       Mattise: if policies and rules resolved things, Lawyers would be out of work.
[19:17] <AutisticPsycho>        B-R-S. Same.
[19:17] * B-R-S keeps quiet about the family business (law) :p
[19:17] <Amgine_>       If every article has a banner, the banners become pointless, no better/worse than just headlines.
[19:18] <Amgine_>       Instead of banners, maybe we should make our headlines more interesting visually?
[19:18] <brianmc-phone> Klingon font!
[19:18] <bawolff>       banners?
[19:18] <Amgine_>       MC8's banner template, bawolff.
[19:18] <thewub>        I've been using serif headlines in my personal css for a while. It looks nice.
[19:18] <bawolff>       oh sorry, missed BRS's comment
[19:18] <B-R-S> Less stuffy/normal/un-memorable headlines, Amgine? Or that not what you meant?
[19:19] <thewub>        Amgine_: link?
[19:19] <AutisticPsycho>
[19:19] <Amgine_>       <grumbles and goes to look for the link>
[19:20] <Amgine_>
[19:20] <Mattise>       The fact is that the atmosphere at wikinews is not good. This is talked about on other sites, so this is a generally recognized problem. Doing nothing about this won't help. Wikinews is seen as run by a small, mean group of entrenched editors. This is what I have read in other places. The contributors are falling, even though the work of writing articles and fixing them up is fun. You would...
[19:20] <Mattise>       ...think people would be attracted to the site.
[19:21] <thewub>        ah, that looks rather nice
[19:21] <Amgine_>       that svg, AP, could be a template allowing more flexibility/linking/other tweaks.
[19:22] <AutisticPsycho>        That's a stereotype
[19:22] <AutisticPsycho>        I'm not mean.
[19:22] <AutisticPsycho>        Most of us aren't... except brianmc-phone
[19:22] <bawolff>       Mattise: I've heard the same thing said about Wikipedia too (doesn't mean we can't improve, just saying that in itself doesn't mean we're all evil)
[19:22] <Amgine_>       It's also loaded with weasel words, AP. I would take it with a block of salt.
[19:23] <thewub>        Wikinews does have a particularly bad reputation though, even among WPians
[19:23] <Mattise>       Except for the one review, I have enjoyed my month here and the articles I wrote. But then I began to become aware of the underlying dissension and fighting. There doesn't seem to be a desire to make the site an enjoyable place to be.
[19:24] <brianmc-phone> I'd take that as a 100% accurate characterisation of my experience with enWP.
[19:24] <ashershow1>    gotta go guys, if you come to any conclusions please let the rest of us know on-wiki. thanks
[19:24] <AutisticPsycho>        What's loaded with weasel words, Mattise's statement or the banners?
[19:24] |<--    ashershow1 has left freenode (Quit: Page closed)
[19:24] <Mattise>       I don't know what you mean by AP but I read a thoughtful discussion of it on a wiki user page
[19:24] <B-R-S> As an admin on both enwn and enwp, there is some truth to how both sites outwardly appear
[19:24] -->|    Mikemoral (~Mikemoral@wikimedia/mikemoral) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:25] <AutisticPsycho>        How do I view ENWP
[19:25] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: ?
[19:25] <bawolff> (?)
[19:25] <Amgine_>       Mattise: focusing solely on the very small percentage of time which was not pleasant/successful is... well, it's not very logical. Yet you've spent several days doing so. I think it's no wonder you feel the way you do about the project if you're going to judge it by what was by your own assessment a rather singular event.
[19:25] <AutisticPsycho>        Three words: Fucking choas theory.
[19:25] <AutisticPsycho>        Yes.
[19:25] <brianmc-phone> Through rose-tinted spectacles
[19:25] <bawolff>       oh, i thought you were asking a literal question about how to view it (d'oh) ;)
[19:26] <AutisticPsycho>        Now. Thats how I view ENWP
[19:26] <AutisticPsycho>        It's too big for itself in some ways.
[19:27] <B-R-S> Well, ignoring Mattisse's specific incident, we still have a more general problem. Drama is simply more noticeable owing to the smaller community. However, that small community gives us a chance to become a better community - something WP may never do owing to the difficulty of changing something so big.
[19:27] <Amgine_>       The two projects are hardly comparable; and I don't think en.WP is particularly relevant for this discussion.
[19:27] <Amgine_>       <nods> Agree, BRS.
[19:27] <Mattise>       The incident with my review was in the very beginning. That one incident did not color my view as I stayed and wrote 34 articles. I am talking about what I am perceiving recently, and not about stuff that pertains to me personally. It is how I see others treated.
[19:27] <thewub>        AutisticPsycho: I'd say it's the opposite of chaos theory. enWP could have a hurricane happen to it, but you'd never get consensus for the butterfly to flap its wings
[19:28] <thewub>        I do think the hostility to Wikipedia and "not invented here" syndrome on Wikinews is hurting us though.
[19:28] <brianmc-phone> Nice analogy
[19:28] -->|    Bobby122 (~IceChat7@wikipedia/Bobby122) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:28] <bawolff>       hi Bobby122
[19:28] <bawolff>       thewub: I agree
[19:29] <Bobby122>      Hi
[19:29] <thewub>        Like it or not WP is massively successful, and has a huge pool of potential clued up users for us
[19:29] <bawolff>       I think there are many things at Wikipedia that are not appropriate for us
[19:29] -->|    diego (~diego@unaffiliated/diego) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:29] <bawolff>       But we shouldn't reject things out of hand because Wikipedia does it
[19:29] <bawolff>       Hi diego
[19:29] <Mattise>       As I said, what happened to me is immaterial. It is not the reason that I feel as I do about the atmosphere here. And I don't see the relevance of discussing wikipedia here.
[19:29] <brianmc-phone> Wikipedia contributors arrive with so much passive voice you risk a coma. :p
[19:29] <thewub>        bawolff: precisely
[19:29] <AutisticPsycho>        Mattise: Well, the recent incident with me is a rarity.
[19:29] <diego>   hi bawolff
[19:29] <AutisticPsycho>        I'm a nice guy and I hardly take action.
[19:29] <AutisticPsycho>        I usually don't ban people.
[19:30] <AutisticPsycho>        And the stuff I delete are stale articles, spam and copyvios.
[19:32] <Mattise>       "Like it or not WP is massively successful, and has a huge pool of potential clued up users for us". I agree and I think many users would be attracted to this site as it is much easier to produce material here then on WP. But no. Something drives people off.
[19:32] <brianmc-phone> Wikinews has far more extremes; can any one contributor claim main authorship on 5% of the FAs - as can two in this discussion?
[19:33] <B-R-S> Wikinews has a steep learning curve. Some Wikipedians may well find that they are more likely to get past that learning curve than total newcomers to wikis.
[19:33] <thewub>        Mattise: actually I think it's much harder on Wikinews because of the time pressures. But the reward of having a lasting permanent article is greater, and would probably appeal to certain WPians
[19:34] -->|    Tyrol5 (60ec95f5@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:34] <B-R-S> Hi Tyrol5
[19:34] <Tyrol5>        Hey!
[19:35] <Amgine_>       Gotta run, will be in and out.
[19:35] <Mattise>       The learning curve is steep because it is so hard to find anything out about the site. But writing an article here is basically the same as writing one on WP, except that the standards are lower, comprehensiveness etc isn't addressed, there is not much of an MOS. The articles are short. Much easier I think, than WP.
[19:35] <brianmc-phone> Of whom? :p
[19:36] <B-R-S> What would be very cool is if we took small groups of Wikipedians for an intensive crash-course led by experienced Wikinewsies. All the basics are there, it's just a question of getting used to news style and a few weird requirements that means.
[19:36] <B-R-S> (that, of course, doesn't help us with people wholly new to wikis)
[19:36] [INFO]  2 matches for â..Mattisâ..: [Mattise, Mattisse]
[19:36] <brianmc-phone> I'd favour that
[19:37] <bawolff>       Mattise: otoh, here it has to all be done at the moment, which is harder then wikipedia which is much more eventualist
[19:37] <B-R-S> Mattise: Yes, I actually find comprehensive encyclopedic coverage harder to do - and I have done it.
[19:38] <Mattise>       But the "news style" is very easy to learn. Much easier than learning to write a WP article. Editors that don't have a chance of writing a decent WP article can write a publishable one here. On WP, people spend months, even years on the same article.
[19:38] <Tyrol5>        I personally didn't notice too steep of a learning curve between WP and WN. Although my very first visit to WN was a bit intimidating.
[19:38] <thewub>        someone suggested getting WP Wikiprojects (e.g. Wikiproject Video Games) involved. I think that could work really well, as it gives them an outlet for stuff they have interest in, but can't put on WP
[19:39] <diego>   Tyrol5: I concur
[19:39] <Mattise>       Agree with Tyrol5 to a T.
[19:39] <diego>   My first 3 articles were deleted, and only the one I did with very little original reporting was eventually published five days after the event
[19:40] <thewub>        Mattise: exactly, people can afford to spend ages on a WP article. And they have loads of specialists who polish certain areas e.g. images, refs. We can't afford that (yet!)
[19:40] <brianmc-phone> If you can get people who'll do a pre-review submission in a timely manner, or very detailed failing reviews, yes.
[19:40] <diego>   I struggled with myself trying to write those articles, my English was (and maybe is still) very rusty by then
[19:40] <AutisticPsycho>        Why can we recruit from the Signpost?
[19:40] <B-R-S> <nods> As an experienced Wikinewsie who predates things like the review process, I find that trying to explain things to confused newcomers is all the harder because I'm so used to it. Obviously, that's not good.
[19:41] <brianmc-phone> Yep.
[19:41] <Mattise>       The editors who reviewed my articles (with that exception) didn't seem to find it hard and they were quick.
[19:41] <AutisticPsycho>        Making from switch from WP Signpost to Wikinews wouldnt be hard all.
[19:42] <brianmc-phone> We've quite a history of enWP misfits landing on their feet.
[19:43] <Mattise>       That's not a compliment from my point of view.
[19:43] <brianmc-phone> Why not?
[19:43] <B-R-S> Mattise: Well, that's very good to hear - because I do fear we lose people because we can't explain clearly why we keep failing reviews.
[19:43] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: my previous experiance with some of the signpost editors have been less then positive
[19:43] <Mattise>       I mean " Making from switch from WP Signpost to Wikinews wouldnt be hard all." is not a compliment.
[19:44] <brianmc-phone> People try an article, fail to resolve issues in time for it to still be news, move on and get more success.
[19:44] <B-R-S> Some do. Some just give up as far as I can tell
[19:45] -->|    BarkingFish (~thor@wikipedia/BarkingFish) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:45] <bawolff>       Hi BarkingFish
[19:45] <BarkingFish>   Hi bawolff :)
[19:45] <bawolff>       I see you made it after all
[19:45] <Mattise>       When I first started I was surprised to learn that the "Collaboration" page isn't really for collaboration at all. Maybe real collaboration should be encouraged.
[19:45] <BarkingFish>   Evening all. I wasn't supposed to be here, but since I got back from my meeting, I figured to pop in and see what was going on :)
[19:46] <B-R-S> <surprised> Well, collaboration is certainly okay on there - not that we really get much
[19:46] <B-R-S> Evening, Fish
[19:46] <AutisticPsycho>        bawolff: How so?
[19:46] <brianmc-phone> There's the apparent assumption you can spend an indeterminite tome fiddling towards acceptable; other people are relieved to get it zapped and start over having, hopefully, learned something.
[19:46] <BarkingFish>   hi B-R-S
[19:46] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: in reference to signpost editors?
[19:47] -->|    gopher65 (gopher65@wikinews/Gopher65) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:47] <Mattise>       AutisticPsycho, I don't know who you are or what your recent incident is.
[19:47] <bawolff>       MAttise, AutisticPsycho is TUFKAAP
[19:47] <gopher65>      (AKA, Patrick)
[19:47] <Mattise>       OH!!!
[19:48] <brianmc-phone> One of many Wikinewsies who has paperwork to prove they're sane ;)
[19:49] <Mattise>       Collaboration is the heart and soul of WP. Perhaps that accounts for its relative success.
[19:49] <bawolff>       Wikis do tend to work best when the work can be split up
[19:49] <bawolff>       so people only do the part they "like"
[19:50] <Mattise>       I often wonder why people don't jump in and help a newbie out with his article.
[19:50] <B-R-S> That should definitely happen more.
[19:50] <thewub>        Yeah, collaboration on the article scale is tough on Wikinews because of time pressure, edit conflicts
[19:50] <AutisticPsycho>        bawolff: yes in reference to Singpost.
[19:50] <Dendodge>      We tend to let people get on with it. I'm not sure why, it's just the way the community developed.
[19:50] <gopher65>      I'd like to once again bring up the realtime editor that a few of us were working with a few months ago: Piratepad. It worked great for collabrative editing. I'd like to see the use of such an editor either built into to Mediawiki (as an extension I'd assume), or the use of something like piratepad offical encouraged.
[19:50] <Mattise>       Help in the education and explaining, and help the newbie achieve some success.
[19:50] <Tyrol5>        I actually did got a good bit of help with my first article last July
[19:50] <Dendodge>      I've been asking for more collaboaration for a while.
[19:50] <gopher65>
[19:51] <AutisticPsycho>        Mattise: Yes, I'm TUFKAAP. Guess I should have told you. My bad. ^_^;
[19:51] <brianmc-phone> Wikinews is more individualistic. Smaller contrib base leaves less interest overlap.
[19:51] <gopher65>      Microchip and I wrote an experimental article on that a while ago, and it worked awesome
[19:51] <BarkingFish>   The most collaboration I've seen tends to occur when a story breaks in another language, and contact is sought from other language projects.
[19:51] <thewub>        gopher65: Would definitley like to try that. A few of us were on Google Wave once, but I don't think anything much got done there
[19:52] <gopher65>      It's fun.
[19:52] <BarkingFish>   I saw it happen with a story I filed nearly 2 or 3 years ago, the German "double arm" transplant case, which got collaboration from de.wikinews
[19:52] <AutisticPsycho>        Cuz Google Wave sucked?
[19:52] <diego>   gopher65: that's nice
[19:52] <bawolff>       gopher65: you and half the world would like to see etherpad integrated into mediawiki
[19:52] <B-R-S> Tyrol5: Would you say getting helped early on played a big part in you deciding to stay?
[19:52] <bawolff>       but it'd be complicated
[19:52] <gopher65>      Everyone go to that piratepad link that I linked.
[19:52] <gopher65>      Let's play for jsut a minute so everyone can see what it's like when a bunch of people are on at once
[19:53] <Tyrol5>        BRS: Definately, yes. I was pretty confused about the review process, and the help definitely played a large role
[19:53] <Mattise>       I am interested in about any subject. There are a few that I am just not capable of being helpful for, but mostly I enjoy the putting together of an article, regardless of topic. And if I don't know much about the subject originally, I will by the time the article is written.
[19:53] <BarkingFish>   link please, gopher65?
[19:53] <AutisticPsycho>
[19:53] <gopher65>
[19:53] <AutisticPsycho>        Speaking of Google Wave
[19:53] <AutisticPsycho>        missing picture
[19:53] <AutisticPsycho>        ARGH
[19:53] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: Well its probably only one editor, the rest are probably nicer. But one of them (among other things) told me I was supporting an evil dictator and put a picture of a hanging guy on my talk page...
[19:54] <thewub>        brb, need to restart firefox (goddamn memory leaks)
[19:54] |<--    thewub has left freenode (Quit: ChatZilla [Firefox 4.0/20110318052756])
[19:54] <bawolff>       although to be honest, that was probably more directed to brianmc then me...
[19:56] -->|    thewub (~chatzilla@ has joined #wikinews-workshop
[19:56] <B-R-S> Mattise: This might seem a bit random, but why did you come to Wikinews in the first place? I ask because you were one of a sudden surge of much-needed new editors and I wondered if there was something in particular brought them all to the project
[19:58] |<--    Dendodge has left freenode (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[19:58] <gopher65>      Yeah, like a linkie from another site?
[19:58] <gopher65>      Or a blog?
[19:59] |<--    diego has left freenode (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
[19:59] |<--    Bobby122 has left freenode (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
[19:59] <Mattise>       I really don't know. I always ignored the site and rarely if ever visited it. Recently I have been visiting a lot of sites that I never gave the time of day to before. I can't even remember what prompted me to write my first article. But despite having my first article merged and my second one deleted, I saw very quickly that it wasn't that hard to write an article. (Relatively speaking, as...
[19:59] <Mattise>       ...writing is always hard for me.)
[20:00] <AutisticPsycho>        bawolff: LOL WTF?
[20:01] -->|    diego (~diego@unaffiliated/diego) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[20:01] <B-R-S> Thanks for the reply, interesting
[20:01] <B-R-S> Okay... It's just after midnight in my timezone, so I'm off to bed.
[20:01] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: well there was a back story. There was a dispute. I supported a block by brianmc that was very questionable, etc
[20:02] <AutisticPsycho>        ah.
[20:02] <Tyrol5>        'night BRS
[20:02] <Mikemoral>     The meeting is over, according to the clock.
[20:02] <AutisticPsycho>        Night.
[20:02] <AutisticPsycho>        It is.
[20:02] <AutisticPsycho>        I say we keep going though.
[20:02] <Mikemoral>     That should be fine.
[20:03] <Mattise>       I enjoy copy editing too. But the "atmosphere" quickly started to get me down. So I just kept my head down and tried to stay out of things. But the fact that the community is so small, so everyone reads everyone else's talk page and feels free to but in with whatever (often unfriendly) comment they feel like making, means that it is hard to be quiet and do your own thing here.
[20:03] <Mikemoral>     (I was supposed to be here from the start to host/moderate, but messed up the time)
[20:03] <gopher65>
[20:03] <gopher65>      Here's the article we wrote before
[20:04] <gopher65>      Just to give you an idea of how it ended up looking by the time we were finished (or nearly finished)
[20:04] <AutisticPsycho>        it just crashed...
[20:04] <gopher65>      It was a short little thing, but that was just as an example
[20:04] |<--    B-R-S has left freenode (Quit: We love and hate the ones we need the most)
[20:04] <gopher65>      Yeah, it did
[20:04] <gopher65>      Maybe it can't handle 8 connections at once;)
[20:04] <AutisticPsycho>        Heh.
[20:05] <AutisticPsycho>        I noticed you can choose a lisence in the toolbar.
[20:05] |<--    diego has left freenode (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
[20:05] <bawolff>       Mattise, I think the quiet and do your own thing tends not to work. I'm fairly sure that most of the comments were not meant as unfriendly. When one person thinks something is unfriendly, but the commenter has no idea his comment came off as unfriendly, its not a good situation
[20:05] -->|    diego (~diego@unaffiliated/diego) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[20:05] <gopher65>      That's also why it's probably a good idea to copy/paste it to wikinews on a regular basis
[20:05] <bawolff>       Thus quiet do your own thing just keeps the problem there, since the people causing the problem don't realize what they're doing
[20:05] <BarkingFish>   gopher65: We'd be better using a proper etherpad. Fundraising had over 30 people on in one go regularly
[20:06] <Mattise>       It would be wonderful if wikinews could provide that kind of pleasure. I feel like it has the potential. But that means that the "old guard" has to be willing to allow changes.
[20:06] <BarkingFish>   their servers would probably handle the load better
[20:06] <gopher65>      What's a proper one?
[20:06] <Bleep> BarkingFish: The "proper one" closed a year or so ago.
[20:06] * gopher65      <-------- doesn't know anything about etherpads
[20:06] <BarkingFish>   Bleep:??? We were only using it in January...
[20:06] <BarkingFish>   Dang
[20:06] <AutisticPsycho>        brb
[20:06] <thewub>        gopher65: The software is open source, you can installed on your own server
[20:07] <thewub>
[20:07] <Bleep> The software is open source, though, and we could easily run our own version of the software... perhaps on Wikinewsie
[20:07] <Amgine_>       Mattise: I first experimented with multi-editor interfaces for en.WN in 2005; we've been looking at the possibility for a long time.
[20:07] <Bleep> BarkingFish:
[20:07] <gopher65>      Yeah, I was thinking Wikinewsie too
[20:07] <bawolff>       yeah, Wikimedia has a copy they use for internal stuff ( )
[20:07] <Bleep> BarkingFish: There's numerous "etherpads", but there's no "proper etherpad" any more.
[20:07] <Bleep> Pirate Pad is just one of many.
[20:10] <BarkingFish>   bawolff: That's the one we were using.
[20:10] <Bleep> The only trouble with the software is that it's quite resource intensive, from experience.
[20:10] * Bleep runs an install on his server cluster.
[20:10] <Amgine_>       Server side is not an issue. Bandwidth is the concern I have.
[20:10] <BarkingFish>   I've used iEtherPad before, that's usually pretty stable
[20:10] <BarkingFish>
[20:10] <gopher65>      Are we allowed to use that internal wikimedia one?
[20:10] <gopher65>      Or is that for offical work only
[20:10] <gopher65>      ?
[20:10] <Amgine_>       I think it's a big maybe, gopher65.
[20:10] <Amgine_>       But time to take this load. Back in a couple hours.
[20:10] <thewub>        Philippe is probably best person to ask
[20:10] <BarkingFish>   thewub: When you can find Philippe online that is. I've not seen M. Beaudette for some considerable time.
[20:10] <BarkingFish>   Last I saw of him online was an hour before he disappeared off on vacation about 8 or 9 weeks ago
[20:11] <gopher65>      He seems like he's been a bit overworked for the past while.
[20:11] <Mikemoral>     You could always try his email.
[20:11] <bawolff>       Bleep, I can imagine etherpad being quite resource intensive
[20:11] <AutisticPsycho>        We could toss it on
[20:11] <AutisticPsycho>        If brianmc doesnt mind
[20:11] <gopher65>      What is our monthly bandwidth allowance on Wikinewsie? Or is there one?
[20:11] <thewub>        BarkingFish: Heh, I emailed him about a month ago. He replied back within 5 mins despite being "on vacation" :)
[20:11] <bawolff>       brianmc-phone: Is there any issues with running a Scala app on ?
[20:12] <AutisticPsycho>        It seems you can create public pads on eiximenis... so I dunno.
[20:12] <gopher65>      I'll email him
[20:12] <AutisticPsycho>        The pad I just created said:
[20:13] <AutisticPsycho>        Please use this tool for public information only, and post notes to a public wiki when you're done.
[20:13] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: its sometimes used by devs to plan stuff I know (Which I find ironic)
[20:13] <Bleep> bawolff: I only tend to have ~3 users on mine at any one time, and it just hogs.
[20:15] <AutisticPsycho>        bawolff: Heh.
[20:16] <bawolff>       Bleep, I've been meaning to try out an install on my computer, but havn't gotten around to compiling/installing scala/whatever it needs
[20:16] <Mattise>       Question to bawolff; "Thus quiet do your own thing just keeps the problem there, since the people causing the problem don't realize what they're doing" But what to do. Trying to interact with them usually brings on more grief.
[20:17] <Bleep> bawolff: The only reason I persist with it is that it's kinda crucial to my e-mag - without it our entire planning process would go to pot!
[20:18] <bawolff>       Mattise: Thats a good point. Unfortunately I don't have a good answer.
[20:18] <gopher65>      Ok, email sent.
[20:21] <gopher65>
[20:21] <gopher65>      Ok, piratepad is back up
[20:21] <gopher65>      There is the article we wrote before
[20:21] <gopher65>      As an example
[20:21] <gopher65>      That might not be the final revions
[20:21] <gopher65>      *revision
[20:21] <gopher65>      I think we did a bit more onwiki after we left
[20:21] <AutisticPsycho>        So what else should we talk about...
[20:21] <Mikemoral>     I don't know if anyone asked yet, but did using PiratePad work out well (for real time colloboration)?
[20:21] <AutisticPsycho>        I feel it did.
[20:21] <AutisticPsycho>        With our little test.
[20:21] <gopher65>      Yup
[20:21] <gopher65>      It was great for that article
[20:21] <BarkingFish>   It was good, with the exception of the high load failure.
[20:22] <BarkingFish>   I think we'd be better using the one on Wikimedia's servers.
[20:22] <AutisticPsycho>        If WMF doesn't mind that is.
[20:22] <Mikemoral>     Hopefully, Philippe replies soon.
[20:22] <AutisticPsycho>        I came up with an interesting Audio WN idea today.
[20:22] <BarkingFish>   I doubt they will, it's a WMF site, I don't honestly see that they'd have a problem with it.
[20:23] <bawolff>       I imagine they would be ok if its just occasionally and a few people use it
[20:23] <bawolff>       but the way its setup currently is not exactly geared for large numbers of people using it
[20:23] <gopher65>      Philippe is a pretty on-the-ball guy. I'm sure he'll respond as soon as he has a chance
[20:23] <Mikemoral>     AutisiticPsycho: What's the idea?
[20:23] <AutisticPsycho>        Wikinews Weekend Review
[20:23] <AutisticPsycho>        Esentially a recap of the week's stories in audio.
[20:24] <bawolff>       I get more the impression etherpad on Wikimedia was more thrown on a spare server one day because someone thought it might be useful to collaborate during some internal meeting
[20:24] <AutisticPsycho>        Plus highlighting interesting/notable comments by commenters via the comments pages, twitter, facebook, identica.
[20:24] <Mikemoral>     I remember something similiar brought up about the print edition, before that died again.
[20:24] <AutisticPsycho>        Well... we could toss it on toolserver?
[20:24] <bawolff>       potential load issues probably have not been thought out, so they might be wary about opening it to the world so to speak
[20:25] <bawolff>       (but I'm totally just guessing here, I could be wrong)
[20:25] <BarkingFish>   bawolff: that's precisely what the fundraising team were using it for.
[20:25] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: it would be against toolserver rules
[20:25] <AutisticPsycho>        Oh.
[20:25] <AutisticPsycho>        bawolff: How so?
[20:25] <bawolff>       We're not allowed to install "large" web aps
[20:25] <bawolff>       *apps
[20:26] <AutisticPsycho>        Oh.
[20:26] <AutisticPsycho>        Bah.
[20:26] <BarkingFish>   bbiab
[20:26] |<--    diego has left freenode (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
[20:26] <AutisticPsycho>        Anywho. I feel WWR could work.
[20:26] <bawolff>       Large web applications (e.g. phpMyAdmin, MediaWiki, etc.) may not be installed.... "Installation" here refers to making these available to the public; see further clarification.
[20:26] <AutisticPsycho>        Since it gives us the entire week to brainstorm and write script.
[20:26] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: I think it could. Most audio projects seem to fail when people realize they can't keep up the one thing a day rate
[20:27] <Mikemoral>     And how could we advertise that? Ideally, it would help bring in more readers and editors.
[20:27] <Mattise>       So these are the things that will brighten the atmosphere at wikinews and change the atmosphere?
[20:27] -->|    diego (~diego@unaffiliated/diego) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[20:28] <gopher65>      No, these are merely tools
[20:28] <gopher65>      We've found that Mediawiki software isn't exactly... optimal for news writing
[20:29] <Mattise>       It's good enough. I have no trouble with it (except when someone redirected my article just as I was saving it.)
[20:29] <gopher65>      Keep in mind, Mattisse, that we're basically inventing what we're doing day-to-day;). Everything from policy to the Mediawiki extentions that we use, to the javascript tools that are used all over wikinews, are made (well, largely) by the people you see here, and a few others
[20:29] <gopher65>      So we're still trying to figure out the best way to do things
[20:30] <gopher65>      And yup, that's why we use Mediawiki software. It's "good enough for now", until something better comes along.
[20:30] <bawolff>       Yes, anytime the js does something shity, its probably all my fault ;)
[20:30] <thewub>        ok, I'm off to bed. G'night folks.
[20:30] <gopher65>      Goodnight
[20:30] |<--    thewub has left freenode (Quit: ChatZilla [Firefox 4.0/20110318052756])
[20:30] <AutisticPsycho>        night wubby
[20:30] <Mattise>       That's the strange thing. From my point of view, wikinews has a wonderful interface, with great js gadgets for publishing, commenting etc. Much superior to WP IMO.
[20:31] <AutisticPsycho>        gopher65: No shit it's not optimal.
[20:31] <AutisticPsycho>        But hey... that's the challenge. :)
[20:31] <AutisticPsycho>        Then again... everything else is all corperate based behind firewalls
[20:31] <gopher65>      Mattisse: Yeah, and Bawolff and Amgine and Brianmc and a few others have put in a *lot* of work to make it superior (for news) than WP:)
[20:31] <Mattise>       My view as a newbie who is primarily interested in providing content.
[20:31] <gopher65>      It definitely wasn't always that way
[20:32] <AutisticPsycho>        <bawolff> AutisticPsycho: I think it could. Most audio projects seem to fail when people realize they can't keep up the one thing a day rate Agreed.
[20:32] <gopher65>      *to WP. "than". Pffffft.
[20:32] <gopher65>      Me and my grammar. *shakes head sadly*
[20:32] <AutisticPsycho>        I think that's what always hurt Audio Wikinews News Briefs.
[20:32] <Mattise>       I'm talking about my experience now. That is why it is strange that wikinews can't keep contributors.
[20:32] <bawolff>       Honestly, a lot of foundation projects for Wikipedia seem to fit our needs better than Wikipedia's
[20:33] <bawolff>       flagged revs. LQT to some extent (lqt needs massive work though)
[20:33] <AutisticPsycho>        Also... at least most of our conflict is only with WP.
[20:33] <AutisticPsycho>        Remember when we had our fights with Commons also?
[20:33] <gopher65>      Mattisse: News is also a lot more work than Encyclopedic content. On Wikipedia someone starts a stub article, and it slowly gets expanded and improved over several years. Here the same process has to happen over the course of hours. That's a lot of pressure.
[20:34] -->|    JoeGazz84 (~JoeGazz84@wikimedia/Joe-Gazz84) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[20:34] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: yep
[20:34] <Mattise>       Why is wikinew not on the mainpage of Wikipedia? Instead they have an awful cockedup "In the news' section that is crap.
[20:34] <bawolff>       We're linked
[20:34] <JoeGazz84>     I agree
[20:34] <AutisticPsycho>        We're linked.
[20:34] <JoeGazz84>     They should get news from ENWN though
[20:35] <bawolff>       In the news is in theory supposed to be encyclopedic articles that are currently timely in regards to current events
[20:35] <BarkingFish>   Mattise: We're linked, but Wikipedia has recently had some editors declare that they consider Wikipedia to be superior to Wikinews, and that we're effectively "redundant".
[20:35] <Mikemoral>     NOTNEWS...
[20:35] <AutisticPsycho>        Yep.
[20:35] <bawolff>       (at the end of the day, Its wikipedia, they showcase their content, we showcase ours)
[20:35] <JoeGazz84>     I think WikiNews is a better source to Wikipedia for news
[20:35] <JoeGazz84>     Personally
[20:35] <JoeGazz84>     I never use wikipedia for current thing
[20:35] <gopher65>      They have a group of editors on Wikipedia who are strongly opposed to further interaction with Wikinews. Those editors think that Wikipedia should be covering news events, despite Wikipedia having a "NO NEWS" policy. They therefore see us as a threat to getting the No News WP policy revoked.
[20:36] <BarkingFish>   It came about after the Earthquake in Japan recently. Because we didn't get our first story out for 4 hours, they thought they were better cause their first "article" went out 30 minutes after the quake struck
[20:36] <Mattise>       But you don't have a section like "Today's featured picture"
[20:36] <AutisticPsycho>        Yes. But neither do all the other projects.
[20:37] <AutisticPsycho>        The only two that have those are Commons and WP.
[20:37] <bawolff>       gopher65: however in my experiance thats the minority of Wikipedia
[20:37] <AutisticPsycho>        AFAIK
[20:37] <JoeGazz84>     Do they realize that Wikinews is a lot smaller community
[20:37] <Mattise>       You could have a section of sample wikinews articles.
[20:37] <bawolff>       AutisticPsycho: actually we used to have that. We ran out of pictures
[20:37] <Bleep> (If anyone is around, I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at a comment I just popped in #wikinews... thanks :) )
[20:37] <gopher65>      We could though. It's just a matter of 2 or 3 people here wanting to start and maintain a "picture of the day" section
[20:37] -->|    Nascar1996 (4a229fe8@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #wikinews-workshop
[20:37] <AutisticPsycho>        bawolff: Oh yes we did.
[20:37] <BarkingFish>   Mattise: our way around that is the headlines on the front page, and the copy down the side listing our recent work
[20:37] <gopher65>      If people want to, they can.
[20:37] <bawolff>       Hello Nascar1996. Welcome to the meeting :)
[20:38] <AutisticPsycho>        Nasacar.
[20:38] <BarkingFish>   Those headlines in a way are our five top articles, i'd suppose. They change as other stuff does.
[20:38] <Mattise>       But that is the question: why is it such a small community when theoretically it has so much going for it. (The reason I haven't quite given up on it yet.)
[20:38] <AutisticPsycho>        Back to etherpad for a second.
[20:38] <AutisticPsycho>        We have 3 choices.
[20:38] <Nascar1996>    I was just about to ask if I could be here.
[20:38] <AutisticPsycho>        1. install
[20:38] <bawolff>       Nascar1996: yes, you can be here :)
[20:38] <AutisticPsycho>        2. the WMF etherpad
[20:38] <AutisticPsycho>        3. Use an external etherpad host
[20:39] <BarkingFish>   AutisticPsycho: I'd go for 2, with 3 as a backup
[20:39] <Mattise>       Hi Mascar, I miss you so. You are a wonderful spirit, despite whatever mistakes you make.
[20:39] <Nascar1996>    *Nascar
[20:39] <Nascar1996>    Thank you.
[20:40] <bawolff>       Mattise: We also ignore many of the ideas sterotypically identified to make Wikis grow...
[20:40] <AutisticPsycho>        Nascar1996: Come back.
[20:40] <AutisticPsycho>        We want you.
[20:40] <AutisticPsycho>        Just don't be an ass so much.
[20:41] <BarkingFish>   ...
[20:41] <bawolff>       Nascar1996: yes, you're pretty much self-exiled at this point. You're welcome to come back any time you like
[20:41] <Nascar1996>    <ass?> no comment If you have nothing good to say, don't say anything at all. I need to remember this. Since then I have.
[20:42] <Nascar1996>    "If you have nothing good to say, don't say anything at all." I was regarding myself, not anyone else. Just wanted to clear that up.
[20:43] <Mattise>       Nascar is one of the elements that made this site possible for me. It was his blocking/banning (whatever) that freaked me out and brought to a head my questioning of the way wikinews is run.
[20:43] <Nascar1996>    Wikinews is run well, though we don;t deal with drama that well.
[20:43] <BarkingFish>   Even I'm trying to make an effort at the moment. Albeit it's a slow one, but damnit I'm trying.
[20:44] <Mattise>       I appreciate the effort you are making BarkingFish, and it gives me hope.
[20:44] <BarkingFish>   Things don't change overnight, but people can fix them. It just takes a good swift kick up the (i'd better not say that) to make them realise they ARE in the wrong.
[20:45] <BarkingFish>   And that's what I've needed to make me get my own act together. If I can make the effort, and you know what I'm like, I'm sure others can.
[20:45] <Mattise>       Thank you so much!
[20:45] <Nascar1996>    BarkingFish, don't be so hard on yourself.
[20:47] <bawolff>       Nascar1996: yes suddenly getting overloaded with drama seems to be a recurring event
[20:47] <BarkingFish>   Nascar1996: I'm not. I'm telling the truth. Real life has a bad effect on me and the way I behave elsewhere. Working with 600 hardnuts daily tends to turn you into one. It's the separation between here and work that I need to make to revise my own behaviour here.
[20:47] <gopher65>      What is it you do BarkingFish?
[20:48] <BarkingFish>   I'm a Prison Officer, gopher65
[20:48] <gopher65>      Ah, nice.
[20:48] <Nascar1996>    Lets stay on topic, what all were you all discussing?
[20:48] * bawolff       will eventually post logs btw
[20:48] <Mattise>       But the drama isn't necessary. (And I worked in prisons for years.)
[20:48] <Nascar1996>    Prior to me joining.
[20:49] <bawolff>       Once Wikimedia stops giving me 500 errors for no appearent reason
[20:49] <gopher65>      We were talking about using Etherpad more, and we were looking for a good one
[20:49] <gopher65>      We were also talking about audiowikinews
[20:49] <Nascar1996>    All interesting topics.
[20:49] <phearson>      Yes, what development are going on about that?
[20:50] <gopher65>      And maybe creating a weekly audionews report, in an attempt to slow down burnout among our audionewies
[20:50] <Mattise>       And improving the atmosphere so that contributors don't leave like flies.
[20:50] <gopher65>      I'm not sure phearson
[20:50] <gopher65>      Right.
[20:50] <BarkingFish>   phearson: The suggestion came up to do a weekly review type cast, sort of a 7 day look back
[20:50] <gopher65>      I don't know what else, because I joined halfway through
[20:50] * Nascar1996    thinks we need to get print version back first.
[20:50] <BarkingFish>   I joined about 20 minutes before the scheduled end, so I'm clueless too gopher65
[20:50] <bawolff>       I'm not sure how many people actually read the print edition
[20:51] <bawolff>       Most of the time it was just one user
[20:51] <Mattise>       Consider encouraging collaboration so that the stress is shared and a feeling of community is built
[20:52] <gopher65>      Yeah, that's actually the central idea behind the various things we're working on Mattise.
[20:52] <BarkingFish>   That's what we're supposed to be doing already, Mattise - but the constant drama has been a big breaker to the community "feeling".
[20:52] <Nascar1996>    Most probably just skim through the news contents.
[20:52] <Mattise>       Actually, it's Mattisse
[20:52] <gopher65>      The stress of Wikinews article writing has traditional landed on two people for any given article: the first writes the article, the second reviews it.
[20:52] <BarkingFish>   yeah, it's just that the nick you're popping up under comes up first in my tab complete :)
[20:53] <gopher65>      That makes it much more stressful to write here than Wikipedia, and it drives up our user attrition rate like crazy.
[20:53] <BarkingFish>   I'll remember to double click to get the right one :)
[20:53] <bawolff>       I do think delays to review reduces contributions somewhat. People like instant gratification
[20:54] <gopher65>      EtherPad might help spread the stress of article writing a bit.
[20:54] <Mattise>       Why don't more people collaborate to get an article published?
[20:54] <Nascar1996>    Mattise, you can change your nick name /nick <newname>
[20:54] <gopher65>      While the new audio project might do a bit of the same thing for audiowikinews.
[20:55] <BarkingFish>   You're in the channel twice anyway, Mattisse - if you want to just use the one nick, that would help :)
[20:55] <gopher65>      Well... I don't know exactly. It just usually ends up working out that one person writes an aritcle
[20:55] <bawolff>       One thing I did think about the print edition, would be that it'd be better as a weekly type format to be more magaziny, more a best of Wikinews things
[20:55] <Mattise>       Yes, the audio project is good as there are many people who can't read print for one reason or another.
[20:55] <BarkingFish>   I think the biggest problem is "edit conflicting"
[20:55] <gopher65>      Personally, the few articles that I've worked on collaboratively over the years have been far more fun than solo writing
[20:56] <gopher65>      (And yeah, edit conflicts are horrible)
[20:56] <Nascar1996>    I loved writing Wikinews articles.
[20:56] <BarkingFish>   Collaboration on an article in its present form is hard when you go to submit your work and find someone's already changed what you were contributing to while you were working on it.
[20:56] <bawolff>       typically the only things that get really collaborative are big disasters
[20:56] <BarkingFish>   It can be labour intensive sometimes you get your edit to submit.
[20:56] <bawolff>       lodon subway bombings for example
[20:56] <bawolff>       *london
[20:56] <BarkingFish>   *to get your edit to submit.
[20:56] <Mattise>       I've explained the double name thing multiple times above. The next time I start up web chat the name will be right.
[20:56] <bawolff>       For a while we were the number one hit for london of cc-by sites on google
[20:57] <BarkingFish>   Ok Mattisse - I'm sorry, but i have missed much of the conversation here, due to joining quite late, apologies :)
[20:58] <Mattise>       I know the feeling of someone changing "your article" right when you are in the middle of writing it. But maybe that feeling just has to be dealt with for the sake of the community.
[20:58] <bawolff>       Mattise, I agree with that, I think much of the issues are cultural
[20:59] <Tyrol5>        Collaborating on an article can be laborious, but definitely worth in in the end
[20:59] <gopher65>      That's one of the other reasons why we're investigating the use of EtherPad. It allows many people (35+?) to work on the same article at exatcly the same time, and see each other's changes in real time
[20:59] <bawolff>       Wikipedia's no ownership of articles policy is pretty much the opposite of what we do here
[20:59] <gopher65>      It's great:)
[20:59] <BarkingFish>   What we really need to do is to use the etherpads as much as possible, build live, post the notes on the collaboration page, and submit the article from combined work
[21:00] <gopher65>      Yupyup
[21:00] <BarkingFish>   A little more effort, yes, but it would mean that we could get multiple editors working with no risk of edit conflicts
[21:00] <BarkingFish>   We'd all be working on it at the same time
[21:00] <gopher65>      Here's what I see happening eventually:
[21:01] <gopher65>      We'll have a main EtherPad page, and instead of logging on to Wikinews when we want to write a story, we'll go there. On that main page, will be a list of all the stories currently being worked on.
[21:01] <Mattise>       But it is selfish. It's great to rack up the number of articles "I" have written. But isn't there other ways of rewarding productivity? I admit that a positive of wikinews over WP is that you get to "own" the article. But is that best overall for the project? The project is failing, isn't it?
[21:01] <gopher65>      If the story you're interested in is being worked on, you join that Pad, and start it up
[21:02] <bawolff>       Mattise: rumours of our demise have been greatly exagerating
[21:02] <gopher65>      If it isn't, you add the article you're working on to the list, and create a new pad for it.
[21:02] <Mattise>       goher65, that's a good idea.
[21:02] <gopher65>      That way we can have multiple articles writen all at the same time:)
[21:02] <Tyrol5>        I think it'd be fun
[21:02] <bawolff>       People have said we're failing almost from day one. I have yet to believe it
[21:02] <Mattise>       Look at the numbers
[21:02] <bawolff>       page views are up ;)
[21:02] <bawolff>       other stuff is down...
[21:02] <phearson>      from when to when?
[21:03] <gopher65>      We haven't been failing, but we haven't exactly been succeeding. What we've been doing so far is mainly just building the tools that we need to eventually succeed, and occasionally publishing an article while we do it
[21:03] <Mattise>       wikinews is tolerated, probably because it would be more trouble to shut it down.
[21:03] <Nascar1996>    Actually the amount of articles we published most of this month is up compared to the same days in February.
[21:03] <bawolff>       Mattise: compared to wikiversity?
[21:03] <gopher65>      I think we're finally getting close to the point where we have the minimum required toolset to actually, you know, write news:P. Nearly there. :)
[21:03] <Mikemoral>     bawolff: Tempodivalse set up page for the log, btw.
[21:04] <bawolff>       Wikimedia tends to only shut down projects in rather extreme cases
[21:04] <Mikemoral>     [[]]
[21:04] <bawolff>       Mikemoral: oh good, I've been trying to post to a subpage just as a space, but wmf servers hate me...
[21:04] <BarkingFish>   and even then, discussion on shutting a wikimedia project can take *months*
[21:04] <Mikemoral>     Or for dead projects, like simple.wikiquote.
[21:04] * bawolff       still mad about
[21:04] <BarkingFish>   I know one discussion at least which was argued over for well over a year.
[21:05] <gopher65>      Klingon?
[21:05] <bawolff>       I think the 9/11 wiki is the only "project" (As opposed to language) thats been shut down. (and really it was moved instead)
[21:05] <bawolff>       gopher65: yep
[21:05] <BarkingFish>   And yet there are new options opening too. There is talk of a wiki written in a special system called "Signwriting", built for the ASL community.
[21:06] <bawolff>       Used to exist. I even had an account there (because i thought it was just that cool)
[21:06] <bawolff>       BarkingFish: yeah I've heard of it
[21:06] <Mattise>       Are you going to argue that wikinews doesn't have an "atmosphere" problem and that editors are leaving?
[21:06] <bawolff>       GeraldM likes to blog about signwriting
[21:06] |<--    diego has left freenode (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
[21:06] <gopher65>      Arabic Wikinews has been utterly dead for years now (literally one occasionally active user), but it's still around. Surprisingly.
[21:06] <bawolff>       Mattise: Don't get me wrong, there are issues
[21:06] <BarkingFish>   We do have an atmosphere problem, Mattise - even I can't deny that.
[21:06] <bawolff>       But I think "failing" is going too far
[21:07] <gopher65>      I guess it doesn't take much in the way of harddrive space to maintain a very small project. As someone on Wikipedia recently quipped at me when I suggested deleting an aritcle:
[21:08] <bawolff>       We keep deleted articles, so it takes just as much space to delete it ;)
[21:08] <gopher65>      "If we need to, we can whip up a funderraiser for the WMF for the 50 bucks they'd need to by another 5 terabytes."
[21:08] <BarkingFish>   The biggest thing I see in contributor issues is a comparison between Wikinews & Wikipediaa. Bear with me for a moment.
[21:08] <gopher65>      *bye
[21:08] <BarkingFish>   *Wikipedia
[21:08] <Mattise>       But wikinews could be really good.
[21:08] <BarkingFish>   Look at our user creation logs.
[21:08] <gopher65>      It will be:). It just won't happen instantly.
[21:08] <BarkingFish>   We get about 10 signups for accounts per day. Most never get used.
[21:08] <BarkingFish>   Wikipedia gets upwards of 1000 signups per day.
[21:09] <bawolff>       Wikipedia has a slightly better google rank then us :P
[21:09] <Tyrol5>        Not many of those are ever used either (perhaps just for a few edits)
[21:09] <bawolff>       also the majority of created accounts are auto-created SUL things I'd imagine
[21:10] <AutisticPsycho>        Bbl shower
[21:10] -->|    diego (~diego@unaffiliated/diego) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[21:10] <Mattise>       WP has an active recruitment program, mentoring programs, programs that reach out to real world organizations. It solicits professional input ....
[21:10] <BarkingFish>   The question is, how can we put ourselves out there on the level playing field with WP, whilst our active contributor base is so low.
[21:11] <BarkingFish>   Most of the people write news. We don't have a wide enough base I feel to assign people to "jobs" like mentoring and stuff.
[21:11] |<--    Nemo_bis has left freenode (Quit: Vale atque vale)
[21:11] <Mikemoral>     Assign, no. But we can get people to volunteer.
[21:12] * bawolff       thinks we have to be careful to avoid defining our selves in terms of Wikipedia
[21:12] <BarkingFish>   If we could have people who would take specific roles, like a recruitment co-ordinator, mentors, advisors, etc, that would help.
[21:12] <BarkingFish>   Yes Mikemoral - but if those people volunteer, will the quality and quantity of their general contribution to newswriting suffer as a result?
[21:12] <Mattise>       I'm not defending WP. I don't even think most of their articles are very good. But they do work at improving the place. And one big issue they work on is improving civility and holding Admins accountable for their actions, plus expecting Admins to set explanatory behavioral examples.
[21:13] <Mikemoral>     Since they volunteered, obviously they were willing.
[21:13] <Mikemoral>     to help
[21:13] <BarkingFish>   There's a difference between willingness, and having the time to be willing :)
[21:14] <BarkingFish>   If they find they can't cope with both after a while, we're back to square one
[21:14] <Mattise>       There is a large issue of "vested ediors" who no one will block etc. (same with Admins) and they are chipping away at that.
[21:14] <bawolff>       The problem with blocking admins, is it just doesn't work out well
[21:14] <phearson>      Also, no active admins here at any given time during a disruption.
[21:15] <BarkingFish>   As we should be too, Mattise - no one is above the rules.
[21:15] <bawolff>       No one purposely does something that they think is wrong
[21:15] <Mattise>       It is being done increasingly at WP plus an increased rate of desyping of Admins for behavior that was routinely tolerated before.
[21:16] <bawolff>       So when blocking admins, people tend to get in fights about, I'm in just as much a position to determine if my behaviour is wrong as you are)
[21:16] * Bleep is pleased that he's not the only one to see two of the main issues with WN as a newbie.
[21:16] * bawolff       does not want to see us go back to the days where admins had wheel wars...
[21:16] |<--    diego has left freenode (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
[21:16] <phearson>      not enough AGF here also...
[21:16] <Bleep> As in, flawed PR (I think it's needed, but it's just too slow - that's the only issue.) and certain users (Not naming names!) being held, err, as if they're the be-all-and-end-all.
[21:17] -->|    diego (~diego@unaffiliated/diego) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[21:17] <BarkingFish>   Bleep: The issue of PR is being looked into, I believe. There is discussion somewhere about unreviewed articles being allowed to go to the main page as published
[21:18] <Mattise>       There has been a cultural shift. WP wants to appeal globally. The standards of North American/British editors etc. are increasingly being questioned as automatically right. Because these tend to be "old timers" this is a difficult process but it is moving forward.
[21:18] <BarkingFish>   Mattise: It depends on what you define as an old timer :)
[21:18] <BarkingFish>   I've been with Wikipedia 6 years, but only 2 with Wikinews.
[21:18] <bawolff>       BarkingFish: in theory, thats what we were going to discuss here (un reviewed articles)
[21:19] <Bleep> BarkingFish: Yeah I've been keeping an eye on it, but I'm trying not to get too involved with non-content stuff here. I have enough drama at my "home wiki".
[21:19] <Bleep> BarkingFish: Though I disagree with anything to publish un-peer-reviewed articles.
[21:19] <Mattise>       People who joined 2006 and before, when it was "their" place to run as they wanted.
[21:20] <bawolff>       Thats probably a short list
[21:20] <BarkingFish>   Joined here?
[21:20] <bawolff>       thats like Me, amgine, brianmc, maybe TUFKAAP
[21:21] <Mattise>       Agee with BarkingFish that nothing unreviewed should be published. A quick way to lose credibility, besides all the other reasons, copyvio, inaccuracy etc. Does wikinews have a BLP policy:
[21:21] <bawolff>       not paticularly
[21:22] <bawolff>       Technically BLP is a foundation policy, and all projects are urged to follow it i think
[21:22] <Mikemoral>     But not required?
[21:22] <BarkingFish>   Mattise: I think you misunderstand. I agree with unreviewed articles being published. It would be one way to shorten the queue for people wanting their work on the site without the wait.
[21:22] <bawolff>       Mattise: we sort of have
[21:22] <Mattise>       Joined WP. I have no idea what the history is here, but I recognisze some of the "old timer" behaviior that is problematic at WP.
[21:22] <BarkingFish>   The option is still there for editors to peer review the work though
[21:22] <Bleep> All we need is for people who get reviewer status to actually review articles.
[21:22] <bawolff>       meh, we did unreviewed articles for quite a long time. The sky never fell
[21:23] <Bleep> And not make it so hard to get said right.
[21:23] <BarkingFish>   Bleep: And that entirely depends on how much time they have to contribute to doing that.
[21:23] * bawolff       considers nominating Bleep for reviewer on that note
[21:23] <gopher65>      I don't think the revised BLP were ever adopted, were they?
[21:23] <gopher65>      *BLP policy was
[21:23] <Bleep> BarkingFish: I don't disagree at all, but, for example, instead of all the conversations spent on how to "fix" the system, several articles could have been reviewed.
[21:24] <bawolff>       I think a large issue is the responsibilities of a reviewer are ill-defined
[21:24] <Mattise>       No BLP policy is a problem for WMF.
[21:24] <Mikemoral>     When I got review, I had only written 2-3 articles, now the requirements are much, much higher.
[21:24] <Bleep> All I'm saying is that it's not just time, it's also an urge.
[21:24] <Bleep> Mikemoral: Yeah, that's another issue.
[21:24] <BarkingFish>   Bleep: True. But policy has got to be discussed before it can be fixed.
[21:24] <bawolff>       Mikemoral: really, I thought you predated the reviewer system
[21:24] * Bleep has been told not to apply for reviewer yet.
[21:24] <phearson>      I think we are getting off track here...
[21:24] <Mattise>       I agree. There needs to be clear standards for reviewer to follow. It would help them and the article writer also.
[21:24] * bawolff       wants to go back to easy come easy go
[21:24] <Bleep> Apparently, 4 articles, 4 years WMF and my own e-magazine mean I would fail the bar.
[21:25] <Mikemoral>     bawolff: No, April(?) 2009.
[21:25] <Bleep> bawolff: I wouldn't accept per above ^
[21:25] <Bleep> BarkingFish: What's wrong with the policy, though? If it's not broken, don't fix it.
[21:25] <bawolff>       Mikemoral: hmm, thought you were older then that. I suppose we've had reviewer though for a long time now
[21:26] <bawolff>       Bleep, many people (or at least I) feel that reviewer results in loss of contributors, due to delay in getting articles reviewed
[21:26] <Mattise>       What policy an where is it?
[21:26] <Bleep> And, as a "noob", it doesn't seem broken to me - just flawed because people don't review.
[21:26] <BarkingFish>   Bleep The problem is not that it's broken, the fact is that some of it is far from clear, and in some cases doesn't exist at all.
[21:26] <gopher65>      The only thing wrong with the current Peer Review sytem is that it requires a minimum number of people involved in the project in order for it to work smoothly. We're a few contributors short right now
[21:26] <gopher65>      That's all
[21:26] <Bleep> Speaking personally, I'd happily spend more time reviewing than writing, but apparently I'm not going to get it until I've written 20 million OR articles. Likewise for accred.
[21:27] <Mattise>       Agree. Need review standards so reviewers know what they are supposed to do.
[21:27] <bawolff>       +1
[21:27] <gopher65>      If we can get 10 or 15 more semi-active people here, the review problem would disappear
[21:27] <BarkingFish>   If there was a prize for material written in such a way that few people without a lot of time and patience could understand it, some of our stuff would win hands down
[21:27] * bawolff       has been here since 2005, and I still have no idea to what extent a reviewer is responsible to checking the article
[21:27] <Bleep> bawolff: I don't disagree - the problem is that people *don't* review - for example, there's enough of us here, talking, now to clear the review queue.
[21:28] <gopher65>      So really, what the whole "review times are long" debate comes back to is "how do we get more contributors, so that the PR system will work properly?".
[21:28] <BarkingFish>   The things we need to do is not fix the policy, per se, but to reword it and make it clearer for contributors, new or old, to understand from the start
[21:28] <Mikemoral>     People don't like reviewing (at least for me anyways), that's the problem I see.
[21:28] <Bleep> BarkingFish: Very true - I'll admit I've not looked enough to know everything inside out, so I guess that probably needs sorting, along with what Mattise is saying.
[21:28] <bawolff>       There's also the larger issue, that many people don't get joy out of reviewing. At the end of the day, in volunteer projects, annoying things get done
[21:28] <bawolff>       Especially big annoying tasks that have to be done all in one go by a single person
[21:28] <Mattise>       I would review, except for the atmosphere here. I don't think fact checking is that hard.
[21:29] * Bleep would also review.
[21:29] <BarkingFish>   bawolff: that's precisely how I fell into the trap of resigning reviewer
[21:29] <gopher65>      It's not hard (normally). Copycheck is a bit harder, and grammar fixing can be time consuming
[21:29] <bawolff>       My understanding of what I feel a proper check would consist of takes me roughly 2 hours for a rather short article
[21:30] <BarkingFish>   A big annoying task that had to be done in one go, but that's another story entirely.
[21:30] <bawolff>       I feel other people have severely differing standards (well not to mention many people are simply faster then me, but i think some others just do have lower standards)
[21:30] <gopher65>      It's just that sometimes when you log on and you see "8 articles awaiting review", it feels so overwhelming that you don't know where to begin. That's a lot of work.
[21:30] <Mattise>       I would fact check everything, but then that is my background.
[21:30] <gopher65>      I find that I'm actually much more likely to review an article if there are only 2 in the queue than if there are 7
[21:30] <BarkingFish>   gopher65: then you get incidents like mine, "I'll review your article if you clear the review list"
[21:30] -->|    Tempodivalse (4a6b4e33@gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #wikinews-workshop
[21:30] <gopher65>      Heh
[21:30] <Mikemoral>     Hi Tempodivalse.
[21:30] |<--    Tempodivalse has left freenode (Changing host)
[21:30] -->|    Tempodivalse (4a6b4e33@wikimedia/tempodivalse) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[21:30] <bawolff>       yay Tempodivalse
[21:30] <Tempodivalse>  hi
[21:31] <bawolff>       Little late to the party ;)
[21:31] <Tempodivalse>  ugh, i just *had* to ping timeout
[21:31] <Tempodivalse>  Did someone get the logs?
[21:31] <Mikemoral>     bawolff did,
[21:31] <bawolff>       Tempodivalse: yes, and its still ongoing
[21:31] <BarkingFish>   Result, 1 copyvio with serious consequences getting through, an article with the same source 3 times and me failing badly, gopher65
[21:31] <Tempodivalse>  bawolff: yeah, i was stupid and forgot i already had another engagement
[21:31] <bawolff>       no worries, it happens
[21:31] <Tempodivalse>  got stuck in bad traffic
[21:31] <bawolff>       no worries, it happens
[21:31] <Tempodivalse>  got stuck in bad traffic
[21:32] <bawolff>       as an aside, the log is now up to 84 kb
[21:33] <bawolff>       and we've gone on long enough that its actual past 21:00 in my actual timezone ;)
[21:33] <BarkingFish>   Tempodivalse: I had another engagement too, i wasn't expecting this to be still going when I got home from my union meeting
[21:33] <gopher65>      As a rough guide, I find that it usually takes me ~10 minutes per 100 words to review an article. A 400 word article (decent length, not huge) takes me about 3/4 of an hour.
[21:33] <Tempodivalse>  Yeesh. Driving on a two-lane road at night with no streetlights when it's overcast and rainy is ... not fun.
[21:33] <Tempodivalse>  I'm impressed we got so many users in here
[21:33] <Tempodivalse>  did we get any non-wikinewsie wikipedians ?
[21:33] <gopher65>      But I thoroughly read every source, fully fact and copycheck, occasionally google lines from an article to see if they came from somewhere else, etc.
[21:33] <gopher65>      A thorough article review takes quite a while.
[21:33] <BarkingFish>   Tempodivalse: I think Avic is a non wikinewsie, I don't recognise the nick anyway
[21:33] <Mikemoral>     JoeGazz, maybe.
[21:33] <gopher65>      We have JoeGazz84 in here before. I think he's a wikipedian?
[21:33] |<--    BarkingFish has left freenode (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
[21:34] <JoeGazz84>     yep
[21:34] <JoeGazz84>     I am
[21:34] <gopher65>      Oh, he's still here:)
[21:34] <JoeGazz84>     I support Wikinews too
[21:34] -->|    BarkingFish (~thor@wikipedia/BarkingFish) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[21:34] * JoeGazz84     idles a lot
[21:34] <JoeGazz84>     :P
[21:34] <Mattise>       I'm non wikiwise. I don't get most of what's happening
[21:34] -->|    Failz (~goblins@wikimedia/bluegoblin7) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[21:34] <BarkingFish>   sorry about that
[21:34] <BarkingFish>   Wifi dropped off
[21:34] |<--    Bleep has left freenode (Disconnected by services)
[21:34] =-=     Failz is now known as Bleep
[21:34] <Mikemoral>     bawolff: Were you keeping the logs online or offline?
[21:34] <gopher65>      BarkingFish: Heh, I don't remember that incident.
[21:34] <bawolff>       they're offline
[21:35] <bawolff>       they will be online soon though
[21:35] <Tempodivalse>  So is the meeting still ongoing?
[21:35] <Mikemoral>     Yep.
[21:35] <bawolff>       yeah
[21:35] <Tempodivalse>  wow
[21:35] <AutisticPsycho>        JoeGazz84: Why don't you join us then? :)
[21:35] <BarkingFish>   gopher65: Search Wikinews for Alexander Lukashenko, that should give you a clue :)
[21:36] <BarkingFish>   brb
[21:36] <JoeGazz84>     AutisticPsycho: I'm not good at articles/news stuff
[21:36] <JoeGazz84>     Just maintenance
[21:36] <JoeGazz84>     :P
[21:36] * JoeGazz84     has the logs if needed :)
[21:38] <bawolff>       JoeGazz84: stuff like copyediting is always welcome as well
[21:41] <JoeGazz84>     Ah
[21:41] <bawolff>       So this is kind of sounding like the end of the meeting.
[21:41] <bawolff>       Anything else anyone wants to say?
[21:41] <Mikemoral>     It's been mention before that we could split the work in the peer review process.
[21:41] <Mikemoral>     I'm wondering how we can get that to work well.
[21:41] <Mattise>       I think there has been some consensus that the atmosphere needs to be friendlier, that newbies should be offered more help with their articles rather than treated harshly, that figuring out a way of collaborating would be good and take the pressure off single editors, that maybe the issue of article "ownership" should be examined in favor of a more collaborative community, that reviewers...
[21:41] <Mattise>       ...need clear standards so that they will be more comfortable reviewing. Maybe more. Make sure the BLP policy is compliant with WMF, because regular BLP violations is something that would encourage the shut down of wikinews. And the articles are often about living people, but if the sourcing is good, there should be no problem.
[21:41] <Mikemoral>     Oh darn, I just invited Pi zero.
[21:41] |<--    diego has left freenode (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[21:42] <bawolff>       Thats ok. If he shows up it'd be good
[21:42] <Mattise>       I would like to hear Pi zero's views and ideas.
[21:42] <gopher65>      Our stuff always has to be sourced
[21:42] <bawolff>       I think he was already aware of it
[21:42] <Nascar1996>    Hi, I'm back.
[21:42] <gopher65>      The only way it could possibly be an issue would be with Original Reporting articles
[21:42] -->|    diego (~diego@unaffiliated/diego) has joined #wikinews-workshop
[21:42] <gopher65>      So hopefully BLP won't become a problem
[21:43] <gopher65>      (Although we did have that one article, that one time:P)
[21:43] <gopher65>      (Didn't someone try and sue us or something?)
[21:43] <gopher65>      (I don't remember the details.)
[21:43] <bawolff>       I think there's been more then one questionable article
[21:43] <bawolff>       I don't remember anyone trying to sue us
[21:43] <gopher65>      Most were pre-peer review though
[21:43] <bawolff>       There was the piano man one
[21:44] * bawolff       is unsure if they really were mostly pre-peer review. /me would like to see stats
[21:45] <gopher65>      The great thing about Peer Review is that it filters out a lot of the crap.
[21:45] <Nascar1996>    Everyone love stats.
[21:45] <gopher65>      :)
[21:46] <bawolff>       Nascar1996: well some people love stats
[21:46] <bawolff>       which reminds me
[21:46] <Mattise>       If Pi zero does show up, I apologize to him for the grief I caused him. And I never doubted that he was acting in good faith.
[21:46] <Nascar1996>    True.
[21:47] <bawolff>       I've been told that I don't advertise enough. So just to spam it, there be stats there. If you don't like your name on the stats you should opt :D
[21:47] <bawolff>       *opt out
[21:48] <phearson>      Perhaps... Competition to see who can get on the front page?, Might drive up editor count.
[21:48] <bawolff>       But everyone can get on the front page (?)
[21:48] [ERROR] No match for â..(Tempodiâ...
[21:48] [ERROR] No match for â..(Tempâ...
[21:48] <Mikemoral>     You can stick youself if you really want to.
[21:48] <bawolff>       There is a competition in general planned though ( Tempodivalse knows details )
[21:49] <Mikemoral>     Starting in <two days.
[21:49] <bawolff>       Which reminds me i was supposed to adapt the auto counter magic for that
[21:49] <Mikemoral>     I think so.
[21:51] <Mikemoral>     Tempodivalse: ^^
[21:51] <Tempodivalse>  sorry, i got distracted
[21:51] <Mikemoral>     brb
[21:51] <Tempodivalse>  OK, so has anything on the agenda been discussed?
[21:51] <BarkingFish>   Mattise: In relation to that, (Pi Zero thing), I got your message, I'm gonna be going to bed soon, but I'll make sure I get back to you on it, probably tomorrow after work.
[21:51] <Tempodivalse>  I dont' see logs anywhere and my pre-ping-timeout irc version only goes up to 20.17 UTC
[21:51] <bawolff>       Tempodivalse: there was an agenda
[21:51] <BarkingFish>   I haven't forgotten, just been up to my neck in work.
[21:51] <bawolff>       Tempodivalse: posting them in a moment
[21:52] <bawolff>       <--- Logging stops now--->