Talk:Wikinews Foundation/Proposal

Commons

I added a mention of Commons and the "accredited photographer" status they'd like. Should probably canvas some of the people interested in that to get involved too. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 07:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Press credentials

Why is Wikimedia not able to provide press credentials? -Edbrown05 09:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Basicly issuing credentials could cause the WMF to loose the safe harbour protections, making them legally responsible for the contents of the wikis. See n:Wikinews:Water_cooler#Wikinews_Foundation for more details--Cspurrier 20:39, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course WMF has been responsible for the content of its wiki's all along. Now WMF gets cold feet, meaning, Wikinews isn't a safe place to support. It isn't safe because WMF mistrusts original reporting and the accreditation process. Caving to that mistrust means you also don't support, here at least, the accreditation process.

There is a lot involved in making this a truly separate venture. One that has severe difficulties reconciling itself to the WMF generous offer of hosting it freely. "News travels", will WMF continue to back news? I think so. Really, I think WMF are full of timidity. -Edbrown05 08:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Facts of life are one way at looking at this. Name one instance where Wikinews and its original reporting has become embroiled in controversy and sued. Name an instance where WikiPedia has gotten its pants sued off. This mentality of "I'm scared" of being sued is not making sense to me. We, they, know that this is the Internet, and how under a law suit that when it comes to push over shove, how the wiki way works, meaning that all kinds of public and free content bubbles up before public editorial control and response can be excercized. That is just how it is. Being scared of being public, does not work, all projects are transparent. -Edbrown05 09:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)