Wikinews talk:Reference desk

Deletions of useful research resources
I just had to re-add a lot of resources, most of which were deleted by one user (Dan100) (in a single session, with a very small annotation). Many were also removed by subsequent users (MrMiscellanious being notable).

Please never ever ever remove a resource from this list if it is conceivably useable by people in finding new stories or in researching stories. Many of these resources are very hard to find in the first place.

You know I am not talking about vandalism and commercial spam. You know I am not talking about items posted by people who have never used Wikinews before and never post again, and who clearly misunderstand what the list is etc.

I am talking about removing the foundation of what we do here, finding and writing about news. Do not ever undermine this.

If you think a resource has a bias or needs some annotation, make some annotation. If it's mis-filed, re-file it. File it twice. Make a list of biased resources. Make a list of untrustworthy resources. Do whatever it takes to get the bee out of your bonnet, but do not delete it.

This discussion page hasn't been used in a year, and yet Dan100 deleted about half of the items I have even added here, many useful, and oddly enough, 90% of those removed being 'left-wing' or undermining of the current system of media control. Not that all the sources I added were this sort. Comprende? Dan100, comprende? -- Simeon 15:25, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Suggest we think about compiling sources etc. useful to an editor.
Should we import lists from Wikipedia? List_of_newspapers Should we just refer to an open directory like ODP? --119 21:51, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I agree on the sources. I don't think importing the list would be a bad thing- why not do it? Lyellin 07:39, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yahoo
I found this at the Yahoo RSS feeds index:

"What are the terms of use? The feeds are provided free of charge for use by individuals and non-profit organizations for personal, non-commercial uses. We ask that you provide attribution to Yahoo! News in connection with your use of the feeds.

If you provide this attribution in text, please use: "Yahoo! News." If you provide this attribution with a graphic, please use the Yahoo! News logo that we have included in the feed itself.

We reserve all rights in and to the Yahoo! News logo, and your right to use the Yahoo! News logo is limited to providing attribution in connection with these RSS feeds.

We are also including the provider of each individual news story in the feed alongside each headline. Please do not alter this for display. We want our news partners to be attributed for their work.

Yahoo! News also reserves the right to require you to cease distributing these feeds at any time for any reason."

So that would mean we can use Yahoo news, providing we give attribution. Is that right? -- Redge|(Talk) 18:22, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I think we should avoid using Yahoo! News when possible because their links die after only a few days. You can verify this by clicking on the Yahoo! News links at Rumsfeld to remain in Bush administration and Rice new Secretary of State. &mdash; Jeandré du Toit, 2005-04-03t10:11z

Registration required to read linked articles.
I think we should avoid these sources when possible, e.g.: the NYT and SMH. &mdash; Jeandré du Toit, 2005-04-03t10:11z


 * I'm not sure about SMH, but registration for the NYT is free. What's the big deal? You can use Bugmenot if you feel it's an invasion of your privacy to register. The NYT is too important of a news outlet for us to ignore its stories. If NYT ever requires paid registration, then you'll have a stronger case to avoid them. &mdash; DV 10:18, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree we shouldn't ignore them; "avoid [...] when possible" was maybe the wong way to describe it (tho the right way for Yahoo! News which disappears their articles, and makes it difficult to find replacements later, see the above section). How about trying to find the same info in a normal source, and placing that link above those of the hassle links? &mdash; Jeandré du Toit, 2005-04-03t10:39z


 * Due to the troubles the NYT has had from time to time, I agree that they should not be the only source for a news article. I always try to have multiple sources. But the NYT has a large staff of reporters and often breaks a story which is simply reprinted in other news outlets with a credit to the NYT, so it's a good idea to link to the original NYT piece in those cases, in case the secondary reprint link goes bad later on.


 * To help the reader navigate sources for timeliness and relevance, it also helps to order sources from newest to oldest. If the NYT has the newest story, then it's helpful for that citation to appear first in the Sources section.


 * This doesn't come up all that often, so it's not a big deal. I appreciate your sentiment of being annoyed by stories with registration links. &mdash; DV 11:07, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A better system for this
Ideally, we need a db structure to maintin this info.

It is gonna get really big in scope, if not in actual number of real entries, quite soon, if we want stuff to be findable. Eg we need sections for background info, as well as news event sources, and both of those need to be searchable by both topic and location. This can be done using flat text, but it's a lot of work as it scales up. Lots and lots of work, and really hard to do once there are a lot of entries.

So, it would be nice if we had a db, with three metadata tag fields for each resource (resource name as key): news/background, topic, location. Should be able to have multiple tags of each type.

Anyone see any other necessities for it? If noone else can implement it, and we can't convince find some way to do this with the wiki db engine, then I volunteer to set up a mysql table and cgi or something to store the stuff.

- Simeon 22:43, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) - updated Simeon 07:27, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * OK I have started! And it works, and will be able to be queried using DynamicPageList thanks to IlyaHaykinson!

The top of the tree is at Category:Sources.

Each source gets a page of its own, with Source: as prefix to the name please, eg Source:Reuters

Requries an understanding of how Categories work &mdash; that you put tags on the thing to be categorised, rather than manually listing that thing in multiple category pages. The category pages automatically pick up any article which has the associated tag.

Look at the code behind Source:Reuters or any other one, and use it as a template to make new source pages. First make sure you don't duplicate an existing one, look in Category:Sources/All sources.

Also make sure you tag all of them with Category:Sources/All sources !

When copying an existing page as a template, make sure you modify the |sort-order-parameter parts of each category tag. This is not intuitive, and fiddly (try using search-replace of a text editor) ... but it's necessary to make all the entries sort in the category listings, not all come under 'S' for Source:... .

eg


 * you would want to change |Reuters to match instead whatever the full name of the source is.

Regarding duplicate entries, if you think they are needed so that people can find a source under more than one name, eg maybe under it's full name and its acronym, prefer to document the source under the most commonly-used name, then add #REDIRECT pages for the alternative name articles.

Todo

 * move some stuff


 * move all Category:Sources/Topic/ => Category:Sources/Topic/World/Countries/


 * move all Category:Sources/Topic/ => Category:Sources/Topic/World/


 * or should it be Category:Sources/Topic/Location/World/Countries/''


 * something to ponder for a while while making coffee, and before starting a migration.


 * Amgine has suggested in irc that Topic/World/ would last at least until faster-than-light travel.


 * I think it should be ok beyond as well, since Sources:blah for each world can be on the relevent wikinews server for that world, hence mars.wikinews.org/wiki/Category:Sources/Topic/World/... will store sources relevent to that world, and users from earth will grep for leads there, if researching a story on Mars. ehem. Simeon 07:38, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * make a lot of things sort properly using |sort key syntax


 * add a lot more topics, locations, a few more media, and of course many many sources

Any other suggestions? WorldRegions seems a bit naff .. any better word for this? 'Regions' by itself could be confused with provinces, suburbs, etc. MajorRegions is also naff and has 'rR' which is hard to pronounce. GlobalRegions is longer than WorldRegions. WorldRegions looks a bit too much like WorldReligions.

Simeon 19:20, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) & Simeon 19:47, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) & Simeon 07:07, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Further development of category tree
Here is a set of categories - not fully fleshed out - that I've developed from the above experiment, plus a look through our entire category tree for articles.

Before you read it, recall that the idea is not to have a category for each specific case, but to have categories that are used to query using AND, that can isolate a small enough bunch of sources for the specific case you are after, then you can manually examine them to find good ones for your case.

The tree is therefore, not meant to take care of this by itself, the tree really is to keep the list of categories navigable. Readers may sometimes browse it looking for sources, but it shouldn't be expected to cover every case without using the AND query.

So for example, a source may be tagged with 'Disaters and accidents' as well as 'Nature/Earthquake'. This means we don't need to duplicate the 'Nature/Earthquake' category under 'Disasters and accidents' .. or looked at another way, if we wish to duplicate it, we simply use a #REDIRECT.

Here is the list I am thinking about. Any suggestions welcomed. I would like if possible to eliminate the 'Blah and blah' categories, following from the process described above. But usually there is no single word for the concept, and we have these categories already in the article categories. :?

And remember these are tags for keeping track of a bunch of resources for people to use in researching an article. Not for articles themselves. To make a (better) database of resources for our authors to use.

Category:Sources/Topic/Crime and law/Crime gang Category:Sources/Topic/Crime and law/Legislation Category:Sources/Topic/Crime and law/Intellectual Property/Copyright Category:Sources/Topic/Crime and law/Intellectual Property/Patent Category:Sources/Topic/Crime and law/Corruption and nepotism Category:Sources/Topic/Crime and law/Prison Category:Sources/Topic/Crime and law/Whitecollar crime  Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Theatre Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Ballet Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Book Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Film <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Humour <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Installation <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Painting <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Persons/Obituary <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Poetry <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Sculpture <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Television <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Culture and entertainment/Wackynews <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Disasters and accidents <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Economy and business/Daylight saving time <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Economy and business/Company/Microsoft <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Economy and business/Product recalls <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Education <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Food/Preparation/Chefs <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Health/Acupuncture <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Health/Chinese medicine <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Health/Complimentary medicine <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Health/Disease <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Health/Fitness/Yoga <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Health/Western/Drugs <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Health/Western/Surgery <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/History/ <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Human rights/Free speech <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/ANZUS <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/ANZAC <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/ASEAN <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/Commonwealth <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/European Union <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/NAFTA <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/NATO <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Alliance/United Nations <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Space <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Country/France <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Country/United States <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Global <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Africa <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Asia <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Australasia <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Europe <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Middle East <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/North America <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/Oceania <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Location/South America <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Nature/Preservation <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Nature/Earthquake <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Nature/Volcano <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Nature/Weather <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Defence <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Diplomacy <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Election <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Government/Civil service <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Immigration <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/International aid <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/NGO <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Wars/Civil <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Policital movement <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Protest <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Politics and conflicts/Social welfare <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Religion and spirituality/Christianity <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Astronomy/Observatory <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Biotechnology <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Computer <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Cryptozoology <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Environment <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Internet/Spam <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Internet/Peer to peer <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Internet/Wiki <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Social/Media <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Science and technology/Social/Behaviour <BR> <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Athletics <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Boxing <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Chess <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Cycling <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Football/American <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Football/Australian Rules <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Football/Canadian <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Football/Rugby Union <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Football/Rugby League <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Football/Soccer <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Golf <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Ice Hockey <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Judo <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Sailing <BR>Category:Sources/Topic/Sport/Swimming <BR>