User:Darkfrog24/Speed

Wikinews encourages writers to be bold. However, boldness does not work the same way on Wikinews as it does on Wikipedia. This is because our work is time-sensitive. If an article isn't composed, proofread, edited and reviewed while it is still WN:FRESH, we will almost always discard it. Sometimes a well-meant BOLD edit may render an article unpublishable, causing delay. All Wikinewsies must accept that this will happen once in the while, even for otherwise perfect articles, but the chances can be minimized. Boldness on Wikinews might be better describred as do it yourself.


 * If you see an improvement you could make to an article in development or review, be bold and make it yourself, even if you think the original drafter should have already done it. Start a thread on the collaboration page if you feel the need to explain yourself, but this will not always be necessary.


 * If you see someone has requested a change on the collaboration page instead of making it themselves. 1) Assess whether the change is good. 2a) Reply with your reasons for not making the change yourself or 2b) Make the change, even if you feel the requester should have done it themselves.


 * If you see someone has availed themselves of 2a), and you find their answer unconvincing, make the change yourself, even if you think your suggestion was brilliant and they should have enacted it themselves.


 * Because the diff will show up on your contribution history, you are responsible for it, so you are not required to make changes you don't believe in. Conversely, if someone doesn't want to do what you've told them to do, accept their decision and move on.  If they have no intention of reverting you, make the change yourself.

This course of action has a downside: It can lead to hardworking Wikinewsies shouldering more than their fair share of the work, sometimes without the other party realizing it.

Good reasons to tell other Wikinewsies to do extra work

 * "I attempted to perform this action and failed, but I think someone else could succeed."
 * "I am new to Wikinews and I don't want my well-meant BOLD edit to render the article unpublishable, so I'm posting this suggestion on the talk page. What do more experienced Wikinewsies think?"
 * "I would do this myself, but I don't speak the language the source is written in."
 * "I would do this myself, but since you've read the source already and I haven't, you probably already know where to find the information I want&mdash;and whether that information exists at all. The source is so very esoteric to me that it would take longer for me to understand it than for me to wait for you to read this message."
 * "I would do this myself, but I have so little expertise with this subject that I'm worried I would make a mistake that would render the article unpublishable."
 * "I would do this myself, but I am so pressed for time right now, and the idea requires some research. If you have time, would you do me a favor and do the legwork to see if this suggestion is viable?"
 * "I would do this myself, but I would like the option of being this article's reviewer, so would you do me a favor and make this small change so I remain eligible?" (NOTE: If it's a large change, then the reviewer is ineligible, even if they only suggested it.)
 * "I would do this myself but I am not sure my idea really is all that good and I want to run it by you before enacting it. What do you think?"

Bad reasons to tell other Wikinewsies to do extra work

 * "I just enjoy telling other people what to do."
 * "I did the work of coming up with my idea, so someone else should do the work of figuring out how to use it."
 * "I appoint myself a teacher. Other people should consider taking orders from me a learning experience."

We're all people. You are allowed to have an ego, but so is the other guy.

Respectfully encouraging others to do what you think is their share
We will all sometimes disagree on whose job is whose. Consider the following ways of informing another Wikinewsie that you think a certain task is their job:
 * "I notice you often leave talk page requests for extra information that isn't in the sources. Is there a reason why you don't just add it yourself?"
 * "I notice you don't enact my talk page recommendations. Is there something I need to know?"

Most importantly of all...
...take no for an answer and move on. With the strictly defined and limited exception of reviewers telling drafters how their articles fail to comply with policy, we are all colleagues and equals here. No one is required to take orders from anyone else or enact someone else's vision of an article. If you want it that badly, remember this is a collaborative project, first drafters do not own their articles, and you are absolutely allowed to enact your vision yourself.