Talk:Newsvine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 12 June 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus; default to keep. |
I'm going to start adding stuff. Entry doesn't even begin to cover the complexities of the site; though, it was more than sufficent when Beta was around. RegBarc 03:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Newsvine In The News
Do we need to start a section about when newsvine has been featured in the news or discussed. Currently there is a mention about the discussion of newsvine on inside the net but it seems to stand by itself somewhat. Lee 14:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] History?
I don't know, I'd kind of like to see a bit of Newsvine's history written - not just it's features. --Oreckel 20:23, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to see some history of Newsvine but I think we could also do with some notation of stories Newsvine has broken and other Internet-Events which have taken place on the site. -- Killfile
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Newsvine logo.png
Image:Newsvine logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Where is the Chat Lobby?
Is this feature still available in Newsvine? I can't find it. Ryanwiki 06:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Banning
The Newsvine staff bans users arbitrarily, often without explanation. This is a feature of the site that should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.65.77.28 (talk) 23:26, August 26, 2007 (UTC)
Look, if you can't cite a reference for this statement, I'm going to continue deleting. Without some sort of solid backup, this is a statement of opinion, not fact. Arak80 17:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Will Newsvine ban users? Yes, there are several users who have been banned to my knowledge. Sometimes there is some sort of statement about it, but usually the user simply disappears. Are the bannings arbitrary? The reason for banning has not been mentioned in any of the bannings that I was aware of, although sometimes there was non-specific mention of violations of the Code of Honor. However, there are many users who commit flagrant violations of the Code of Honor who are not banned, and there is even one user who was simply required to change her login name after having violated copyright, a crime which could have exposed Newsvine to litigation. Therefore, the bannings are arbitrary. Are the bannings sometimes political? The users who are allowed to commit violations of the Code of Honor are generally in one political camp, and several of the banned users were adamant opponents of that camp. One banned user was an experiment designed to test whether bannings were politically motivated: Jimmy Bilokonsky Unless the Newsvine entry in Wikipedia is intended to be an advertisement for Newsvine, it seems that it ought to cover aspects of Newsvine other than what can be found on Newsvine's own introduction pages. The other content of the Newsvine entry reads like a press release written by an employee of Newsvine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.65.77.28 (talk) 03:50, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
I completely agree with you, it should cover other aspects of Newsvine. However, the manner you have it presented on the article page is a statement of opinion, not one of fact. You cite several examples on the discussion page which should be included in the article. You should try writing up something like you have here in order to make it sound less like you have an axe to grind. Arak80 04:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
It would be a lie to deny that I have an axe to grind, however, I have stayed with the facts. A little busy now, but I will try to incorporate the discussion points at a later time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.65.77.28 (talk) 07:09, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Cool, I look forward to seeing it. I don't participate on Newsvine all that much, but I do read it quite a bit and am aware of all the petty issues that float around that then turn into huge issues. Don't know much about banning though, so I think it would be interesting for other readers to see. Arak80 01:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Hope you found my changes to be an improvement. There's an article on mobbing aka hunting on Newsvine itself which I just encountered which I am considering citing in the mobbing section, though I want to talk to the author first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.65.77.28 (talk) 05:35, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mobbing
I'm wondering if maybe mobbing belongs under the Community heading, since it is an aspect of the community itself's behavior, rather than an official feature of Newsvine (in contrast to bannning, which is an official policy, whether stated or not). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.65.77.28 (talk) 08:42, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Recent edits
Regarding several of my recent edits, including this one (which is representative of all of them), I remind users that Wikipedia is not a soapbox, and complaints about Newsvine should be taken up at Newsvine, not here. The information is of dubious factuality, is highly opinionated, and is clearly not encyclopedia in nature. – Mipadi 20:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
All the information you approved of in the Newsvine entry is taken straight from Newsvine pages: are Wikipedia entries to be limited to the information supplied by their subjects? Newsvine is a community: is community behavior outside the realm of a Wikipedia entry? Newsvine is a moderated forum: is moderator bias outside the realm of a Wikipedia entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.65.77.28 (talk) 00:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Are insults really a persuasive technique? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.65.77.28 (talk) 15:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone comment on the reception of Newsvine? From what I've seen, it doesn't really seem to have captured the audience it wanted to, with most people sticking to big media websites or social news like Digg. This article seems a little thin. --132.162.133.156 (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
