en: We could help Wikinews become a singular and strong presence within the Canadian media, heightening awareness and acceptance of the source.
fr: Nous pourrions aider Wikinews à devenir une présence forte et singulière parmi les médias canadiens, augmentant l'acceptation et la connaissance d'une telle source.
en: Just a friendly note from a chapter which has already spent time pondering this - the general advice is: take extreme caution. One idea that was floating around both on WMF and Chapter level was to issue press passes or ID to Wikinewsies. As far as I know no chapter has actually decided to do this. The reason is that press law (in most jurisdictions) makes the organization that authorizes the ID responsible for the actions of the journalist and for the content he/she produces, making you de facto a publisher of the content found on Wikinews. You do not want to be regarded as the publisher. Ever. :) It is generally not a good idea for a chapter to serve as an official organization behind any of the Wikimedia projects, Wikinews included. Please take care to examine the way this works in Canada before moving forward. Best, --TOR13:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
fr: Un petit mot d'un chapter qui a longtemps réfléchi à cela : soyez prudents. Une idée qui fit le tour de la fondation et des chapters était de donner des cartes de presse aux contributeurs de Wikinews. Pour autant que je sache, nul chapter ne l'a essayé, parce qu'en droit (dans la plupart des juridictions), on tient responsable l'organisation autorisant la carte de presse des actions des journalistes, vous faisant de facto éditeur du contenu de Wikinews. Vous ne voulez pas être vus en tant qu'éditeurs. Jamais. :) Ce n'est généralement pas une bonne idée pour un chapter de servir en tant qu'organisation officielle derrière quelconque projet Wikimédia, y inclus Wikinews. S'il vous plaît, prenez votre temps pour examiner comment cela marcherait au Canada avant de continuer.
en:In relation to my comments on /localHistory about museums etc re history/geography, one thought about WikiNews is that outreach to writers at local newspapers to encourage them to contribute original content and/or carry material from their own newspapers is one way to do this; keeping up with the news is a full-time occupation/business and it's been very difficult to keep pace with breaking news; our elections groups have done a really good job, but it's harder to cover things like court proceedings (the Airbus trial, w:Railgate and the like). WikiNews offers an opportunity to break the press monopoly control of information in this country, but because of what's noted above there's a lot of responsibilities attached, even without the press pass issue. "Establish more press presence" is a good idea, but the established press won't like the competition for "authority of information" and it's more, I'd say, for now, finding ways to expand WikiNews content far beyond its cursory nature at present; it quickly becomes WikiHistory as such articles pile up over time; and there's always a fineline between reportage and op-ed....also, the usual RS rules are not reliable, partly because the major news sources aren't often reliable, but blogs (normally not RS) often carry materials that are more reliable, and cover things the big media won't. It could become a public alternative to the news monopolies, while still citing them....but often citing them means critiquing their content when it "doesn't perform" or is demonstrably POV (as it often is). Anyway I think outreach to individuals reporters, columnists and reputable bloggers about WikiNews' existence is a good thing. The issue is monitoring content; most of us are alreayd busy enough just with Wikipedia proper.Skookum115:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
