News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on WikiTribune – Evidence-based journalism. Parent comment

Re:WikiTribune – Evidence-based journalism by frik on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @05:54AM (#14192059)
It's seems to be carved out of news section from Wikipedia frontpage, like Wikia was carved out of Wikipedia trivia sections. It's again Jimmy who launches a private company and suddenly Wikipedia changes the rules to forbid trivia section to boot his for profit offspring. Conflict of interest it's called.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WikiTribune – Evidence-based journalism by cooper12 on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @09:02AM (#14193036)
> It's seems to be carved out of news section from Wikipedia frontpage

Other than the fact that WikiTribune will use actual journalists doing original reporting? Wikinews just summarizes current events.

> suddenly Wikipedia changes the rules to forbid trivia section to boot his for profit offspring

What evidence do you have for this? Conspiracy theorists love making outlandish claims they can't substantiate at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WikiTribune – Evidence-based journalism by JdeBP on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @01:20PM (#14195839)
> Wikinews just summarizes current events.

Not true. It has original reporting, too.

* https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Original_reporting

I wrote an original reporting article for Wikinews once.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WikiTribune – Evidence-based journalism by frik on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @10:32AM (#14193830)
Ask someone who is older than 20, everyone remember the trivia sections on many Wiki pages on Wikipedia.

Search for trivia eg on this page: http://www.slashdot.org/story/91607

It of course not easy to point to older events with a still working link, when 1) Wikipedia deletes it's own history, 2) Wikipedia and trivia are such common words it's hard to find, 3) even news sites change so much.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WikiTribune – Evidence-based journalism by cooper12 on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @11:12AM (#14194211)
Random slashdot comments aren't a source and don't back up what you portrayed as a conscious effort by Jimmy Wales to forbid trivia sections for his own personal gain. Maybe it's just possible that the editors themselves decided those sections weren't appropriate?

> Wikipedia deletes it's own history

Only for copyright violations and offensive vandalism. It never has for anything else, but of course you won't back this claim up either and will make up more excuses.

Conspiracy theorists just dig themselves further and further into a hole, to the point where everything else is also a conspiracy against them getting their "truth" out.

[ Parent | on HN ]