Wikinews:Writing contest 2023

The contest has ended. Thank you for participating.

Welcome to the Wikinews 2023 Writing Competition.

Anyone, including you, can enter this competition.

A project run by a Wikinewsie.

Entrants edit

Please list yourself here if you wish to partake.

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--Heavy Water (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
—-RockerballAustralia contribs 06:07, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
---JJLiu112 (talk) 07:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--A Chinese ID (talk) 12:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
—Johnson524 (talk) 04:18, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--DRC-B5 (talk) 12:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--SVTCobra 20:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--Gryllida (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--Kitabc12345 (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--nofacehellas (talk) 05:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Standings edit

The contest ended on May 1.

Standings in the 2023 writing contest
Rank	User	Points	Articles
0	Koavf	0	0
2	Heavy Water	97	6
5	RockerballAustralia	16	2
1	JJLiu112	102	3
8	A Chinese ID	1	1
6	Johnson524	8	2
4	DRC-B5	46	12
3	SVTCobra	79	12
7	Gryllida	3	0
#	Kitabc12345	0	0
#	nofacehellas	0	0
#		#	#

Competition rules edit

Eligibility edit

Anyone, including you, can write articles on Wikinews.

Please register an account if you do not already have one and sign up here.

Duration edit

The competition started on February 1, and ran for twelve weeks, finishing on May 1. Submissions for review ran from 00:00 on start to 23:59 on end. (All times per Recent Changes - UTC).

Point scoring edit

To keep track of scores, please create a category for articles you enter in the contest and name it Category:<Your username here> (WWC 2023): e.g., Category:Heavy Water (WWC 2023). When creating the category type Category:Writing contest 2023, then __HIDDENCAT__.

Character counts will count spaces, but will not count characters in image captions and credits, nor outside of the body of the article-so characters in the Date template, the infobox, and the Related news, Sister links, Sources, and External links sections will not be counted.

Synthesis article (Constructed from several credible sources in your own words)
1. 1 point only for an article meeting the one-paragraph and 100-word minimum, and other publication criteria, yet below the required 1,200 characters to obtain 3 points.
2. 3 points for an article of at least 1,200 characters when published after any required copyediting.
3. 2 points extra per additional 700 characters after copyediting (5 @ 1,900, 7 @ 2,600, 9 @ 3,300, 11 @ 4,000, ... )
Original reporting (N.B. {{broadcast report}} explicitly excluded from OR eligibility; such may be submitted as synthesis articles)
1. 2 point only for an article meeting the one-paragraph and 100-word minimum, and other publication criteria, yet below the required 1,200 characters to obtain 3 points. Where several of these articles are produced in a day, they should be collected in a news brief.
2. 5 points for an article of at least 1,200 characters when published after any required copyediting.
3. 3 points extra per additional 700 characters after copyediting (5 @ 1,900, 7 @ 2,600, 9 @ 3,300, 11 @ 4,000, ... )
4. Original reporting content must exceed 25%, or 400 characters, of the article post-copyediting and publication. Any mass article creation efforts surrounding an event require community consultation before starting to make sure reviewers are in place. After the fifth article, all articles in that series count for the same as synthesis articles.
5. This category is designed more for current contributors as a way of encouraging them to conduct it and perhaps push them to do reporting they may not otherwise. Newcomers should be aware that original reporting is based on project trust.
Original interviews are counted separately from original reporting.
1. 2 points only for a brief interview conducted via e-mail where the verifying e-mail notes demonstrate an interview largely conducted with all questions asked in one e-mail with all responses back in a second e-mail.
2. 3 points for an interview conducted over multiple e-mails where it becomes clear the reporter is basing their next set of questions on the responses they received from earlier responses.
3. 2 points for an audio/video interview (with file uploaded to Commons) embedded on the article with transcription where the audio length is five minutes or shorter.
4. 3 points for an audio/video interview (with file uploaded to Commons) embedded on the article with transcription where the audio length is five to thirty minutes in length.
5. 5 points for an audio/video interview (with file uploaded to Commons) embedded on the article with transcription where the audio length is thirty minutes or longer in length.
6. 2 points for all other interview types.
7. This category is designed more for current contributors as a way of encouraging them to conduct it and perhaps push them to do reporting they may not otherwise. Newcomers should be aware that original reporting is based on project trust.
8. Points for original interviews cannot be claimed also as original reporting.
Photoessays (A photographic form of original reporting)
1. 2 points only, provided a minimum of 8 images provided, of which at least 6 have been taken by you.
2. 1 points extra for each additional 5 images.
3. 1 points extra where verbose (per synthesis article point 1.3 above).
4. All pictures must be taken by you except where specified, and uploaded to Commons using a free license unless they were taken at an event where uploading images under a commercial license was prohibited. Evidence of this restriction is required.
Articles, or portions of articles, copied wholesale from compatibly-licensed websites (such as Voice of America), will not be accepted for the writing competition (although you are still free to make use of them outside the contest). All prose in articles you create for the contest should be your own.
Reviewing
1. 1 point for a review with no or unspecific feedback.
2. 3 points for each review conducted where detailed review feedback is left that assists articles labeled not published in becoming published, or indicates that all the criteria for a review were checked.
3. 2 points extra for reviewing an article of at least 1,200 characters when published.
4. Points can be awarded regardless of whether the submitted article is part of the contest or not.
Other Wikinews community building
1. 1 point for every new contributor that says they started on the project because of an invitation by a person where the new contributor successfully gets published an article not reviewed by the person.
2. 1 point for spoken word versions of published stories.
3. 1 point for each article that is published on another language Wikinews project.

You can preview how many points an article gets using the character count gadget (in special:preferences under gadgets). (Note: human judges have final authority in judging if there is a conflict between the gadget and a human judge).

Note! In the event of an unexpected major international event, such as a tsunami, site administrators may decide to withdraw the initial article from the competition and prioritise news reporting. Competitors are, in such circumstances, encouraged to engage in followup original reporting to keep readers better-informed; such will qualify for the competition.

Note! If it looks deliberate quick fails of articles that could pass with a more thorough review in order to clear any review queue or you are quick passing questionable articles, you may lose your review bit or be removed from the contest.

Experienced contributor handicap edit

Experienced Wikinewsies may carry out original reporting for the competition. Their final score will be handicapped by reducing to 85% of the total score for all articles of all types submitted for the contest.

The requirement to identify for prizes should discourage experienced Wikinewsies from creating an account to enter as a new contributor. Suspicion of such as a way to gain unfair advantage in the competition is grounds for use of checkuser on the suspect account.

Newcomers - restrictions and added responsibilities edit

As a new entrant, you are requested not to carry out original research for your first 5 articles or the first 2 weeks of the competition, whichever comes first. This is to ensure you have gained experience on the project and had time to look around and see where original reporting is appropriate and how to handle getting it accepted by reviewers.

Should there be suspicion of a 'group' entry operating under a single pseudonym, this would be grounds for use of checkuser, possibly leading to disqualification.

Post-close Featured Articles edit

While the contest is in progress, no articles entered in it may be put forward for featured article status. Following the close of the competition, all entrants and other Wikinews contributors will be invited to submit works which are not their own for featured status.

Each promoted FA will be awarded an additional 20 points.

This process should run for no longer than two weeks; prizes may be awarded earlier, or based upon sponsors' evaluation of the final scoring.

Essential reading edit

Competitors edit

When you sign up for Wikinews, you should get the {{Howdy}} template on your user page; please refer to the policy links therein. In addition, read the essay on writing your first article; this lays out vital aspects of article construction to meet the Wikinews house style.

If you are a shutterbug, you might want to look at the rough guide to contributing photoessays. Consider combining this with the Wiki Loves Art project to get access to local museum exhibits and write stories on them with lots of photos. Sporting events are another candidate for photoessays; please check terms of entry on tickets to see whether photography is allowed or contact the organiser. You do not need to be an accredited reporter to request press access to events but, please discuss with existing accredited reporters on how to make an approach - samples of your work will improve your chances of admission.

Reviewers edit

Those carrying out reviews during the competition (requires reviewer privileges) should review all policies prior to the start of the competition. As some competitors may already have the required permissions they should be careful to be unbiased when reviewing the work of other competitors.