Talk for Article "WikiTribune: a community contributor’s concerns"

Talk about this Article

  1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    Jean-Jacques, the statement that the question ‘’Can (WT) be revived?’’ of the article “WikiTribune Dead?” “has not elicited the slightest reaction or comment” is not true and should be corrected. There are (and have bin when your essay got online) twelve comments:
    https://www.wikitribune.com/article/95769/?talk .
    Another point is, that the question ‘’Can (WT) be revived?’’ which, according to your essay, “WT community members such as I view as existential” does not applyy. WT cannot be revived because it is not dead.

  2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    I have always said that systems are easy when compared to dealing with people! and here we are trying to make a system that helps to propagate a community that will become a place where unbiased news is created by the general public!
    Building the tools to allow this is relatively simple compared to dealing with managing and growing the community!
    Over the last few days we have been discussing how it is so important to invest in the community as this will be the key to WikiTribunes success.
    I don’t think any of us expected it to be a huge overnight success story and I am constantly surprised (in a positive way) with the participation and readership levels considering we have very little publicity.
    The fact that it is not huge is not a worry as this gives us a chance to work fast, adapt and change without having to go through a million committees that inevitably come about when money and power come into the equation.
    If we can inspire the community then they will come! As they say Rome was not built in a day!
    Finding out how we do this is an ongoing exercise in understanding people and tech and it is something that every member of our small team spends their time thinking about.
    Is WikiTribune dead?
    Certainly not! It is only just starting and with your help we can make a difference

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Hi, I’m a reader. I’m also very cautious as to what I read, what goes into my mind, like junk food and trashy news articles, I avoid them both – garbage in, garbage out. That said, I very often refer to Wikipedia for reference as a trusted source of credible information, so that belief transferred when I read about wikitribune.
      So for me, my reading style goes something like this, Reading an article that I consider worth my time, this often leads to referencing something else within the article, be it a person, place, scientific, even a word that I want to better understand. So I may refer to the dictionary, Wikipedia.
      My general reading criteria is typically, it’s got to be positive, it’s got to be from a trusted source. I don’t buy into conversations online which lead to people winging and complaining but not doing. So, for me to buy into this conversation tells you something, this is what I consider a pretty positive thing, that is constructive, that is providing newsworthy information I feel I can trust, that is worthy of my time. So keep up the good work, the right people will continue to come.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Be the first to collaborate on our developing articles

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Connect with us on Discord Email us