Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Korean Wikinews 2

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a proposal for closing and/or deleting a wiki hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. It is subject to the current closing projects policy.


The proposal is currently open for discussion by the community.


Previous proposal[edit]

The previous closure proposal made ten years ago (i.e. 2010) was based on activity two months after Korean Wikinews, which was very new back then. The proposal failed was shortly withdrawn. (self-corrected, George Ho (talk) 23:44, 19 March 2020 (UTC))

Proposal rationale[edit]

Reformatted from previous revision. George Ho (talk) 03:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

English:

Ten years later till now, Korean Wikinews has suffered from issues. Since inactivity alone is not a valid reason for hard-closure, I'll explain why soft-closure is unsuitable, while hard-closure is more appropriate. The project contained articles that were copied and translated from third-party (or secondary) sources, like Reuters and BBC, before they were deleted. Not only that, there have been also out-of-scope articles, including ones copied from Korean Wikipedia, like one deleted article whose title exactly matches the one from ko.wiki; probably the deleted ko.wn article was copied from the ko.wiki article. Following links below:

More reasons for hard-closure (or soft-closure if proven more appropriate than what I propose):

  • The Korean Wikimedia community, primarily contained in Wikipedia, doesn't appear to be interested in (revitalizing or discussing) this project. I initially addressed my concerns about the project's (in)activity at Korean Wikipedia in October 2018 and had someone else translate my concerns into Korean (w:ko:위키백과:사랑방 (일반)/2018년 제44주#한국어 위키뉴스의 문제점), but the thread received no replies (aside from the translated message). I thought about readdressing the activity concerns at meta-RFC, but then I backed down the idea because I feared it wouldn't attract much attention.
    • I found one February 2018 discussion mentioning Wikinews, but then, via Google Translate, apparently the discussion shifted from Wikinews to mostly 2018 Winter Olympics, pushing Wikinews aside.
    • I also emailed Wikimedia Korea about the project (before this proposal), but I've not yet received its response.
    • In addition, ko.WN's Water Cooler (or Village Pump) venue barely has received replies from others. Some archive pages (like this and that) would help enhance the clearer picture, I hope.
  • If left still open, the project would receive more articles to be copied from third-party sources and out-of-scope articles, including ones copied from ko.wiki, and more of such would be deleted. Moreover, soft-closure would not prevent such issues and would be (somewhat) reversed by the supposed activity.
  • Not one article devoid of major (quality or copyright) issues has been made: New pages, recent changes
  • Leaving the project open, especially to copyright violators, makes (other) open yet inactive (or less-than-active) Wikinews languages sites look bad and poorly supervised.

I know that hard-closure (i.e. locking the project) is typically discouraged by LangCom for potential technical complications, especially when trying to reopen and then revitalize. (Compare Dutch Wikinews's 2010 closure and then 2017 reopening, four years after the reopening was proposed [i.e. 2013]) Moreover, no other steward than the admin/steward knows the Korean language, and I've not yet seen one "interface editor, system administrator, founder [or] staff" who understands the language.

(Updated) I stand corrected; another steward Sotiale understands Korean language. George Ho (talk) 20:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, some of the reasons I provided above appear as if soft-close is more suitable and/or more volunteers are needed to revitalize the project.

However, a project riddled with copyvio issues and almost absent local community is hardly needed, especially when the Korean community either appears disinterested in or hasn't yet displayed interest in the project. --George Ho (talk) 10:45, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Found out that only one article was made in 2019 (n:ko:캐나다 인권운동가에 대한 왁싱 거부 논란) and is still intact but is not an original report; no other articles were created last year, and the one 2019 story reported recently doesn't count (and has copyvio issues). --George Ho (talk) 11:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

The above sections need Korean translation. George Ho (talk) 21:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Certification: n:ko:박연수 (1990년) is an inferior version of ko:박연수 (1990년) - it misses infobox and a paragraph, but otherwise copypaste. — regards, Revi 13:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

번역[edit]

한국어:

10년 후 지금까지, 한국어 위키뉴스는 논란이 되어왔습니다. 미활동이 완전 폐쇄의 합당한 이유는 아니지만, 저는 부분 폐쇄가 부적합한 이유와 완전 폐쇄가 더 적절한 이유를 설명하고자 합니다. 이 프로젝트에는 삭제되기 전에 로이터나 BBC와 같은 제3자의(혹은 2차) 자료를 복사 혹은 번역한 문서가 포함되어 있었습니다. 그 뿐만 아니라, 한국어 위키백과의 것과 완전히 일치하는 제목의 문서가 삭제된 것과 같이, 한국어 위키백과에서 복사해온 것을 포함하여 범위를 벗어난 문서도 있었습니다.(아마도 삭제된 한국어 위키뉴스 문서는 한국어 위키백과 문서에서 복사하였습니다.) 다음을 참고하세요.:

완전 폐쇄(혹은 만일 제 제안보다 더 적절하다는 것이 증명된다는 전제 하에 부분 폐쇄)의 자세한 이유:

  • 주로 위키백과를 포함한 한국어 위키미디어 공동체는 이 프로젝트(의 재활성이나 논의)에 관심이 없어보입니다. 저는 2018년 10월에 한국어 위키백과에서 이 프로젝트의 (미)활동에 대한 제 우려를 처음 제기하였고, 다른 누군가가 제 우려를 한국어로 번역하였으나, (w:ko:위키백과:사랑방 (일반)/2018년 제44주#한국어 위키뉴스의 문제점) 그 주제는 아무런 답변이 없었습니다.(번역된 글은 제외) 저는 메타-RFC에서 이 활동 우려를 재논의하는 것에 대해 생각하였으나, 많은 주목을 받지 않을 것을 염려하여 생각을 철회하였습니다.
    • 저는 위키뉴스가 언급된 2018년 2월 논의를 찾았으나, 구글 번역을 통해 보아하니, 위키뉴스는 한쪽으로 제쳐두고 대부분 위키뉴스에서 2018년 동계 올림픽으로 옮겨갔습니다.
    • 저는 또한 이 프로젝트(이 제안 이전에)에 대해 한국위키미디어협회에 메일을 보냈으나, 아직도 회신을 받지 못하였습니다.
    • 게다가, 한국어 위키뉴스의 사랑방은 다른 이로부터 거의 답변을 받지 않았습니다. 일부 보존 문서(가령, 이것저것)가 머릿속에 그려보는 데에 도움이 되기를 바랍니다.
  • 만일 계속해서 개방되어 방치된다면, 이 프로젝트는 한국어 위키백과에서 복사한 것을 포함하여 제3자의 출처 및 범위에서 벗어난 문서에서 복사한 더 많은 문서가 들어올 것이며, 더 많은 그러한 문서가 삭제될 것입니다. 더욱이, 부분 폐쇄는 그러한 논란을 막지 못할 것이고, 전제되는 활동이 (다소) 뒤바꿀 것입니다.
  • 주요 (품질 혹은 저작권) 논란이 있지 않은 문서가 하나도 없습니다.: 새문서, 최근 바뀜
  • 이 프로젝트를 개방한 채로 방치한다면, 특히 저작권 위반자에게, (다른 류의) 개방되었지만 비활동적인(혹은 활동적인 소규모) 위키뉴스 언어판은 형편없고, 불충분하게 관리되는 것처럼 보일 것입니다.

저는 완전 폐쇄(즉, 프로젝트 잠금)를 보통 잠재적인 기술 분규(특히 재개방 및 재활성을 할 때)로 언어위원회가 권장하지 않는다는 것을 압니다.(네덜란드어 위키뉴스의 2010년의 폐쇄2017년의 재개방의 비교. 재개방은 4년 뒤에 제안됨. 즉, 2013년.) 더욱이, 한국어를 아는 해당 관리자/사무장 외의 다른 사무장은 없으며, 저는 한국어를 이해하는 ‘인터페이스 편집자, 시스템 관리자, 설립자 혹은 직원’을 여지껏 본 적이 없습니다.

(갱신) 제가 틀렸습니다. Sotiale라는 다른 사무장이 한국어를 이해합니다.

또한, 제가 위에서 내놓은 몇몇의 이유는 마치 만일 부분 폐쇄가 더 적합하고/거나, 재활성에 더 많은 자원봉사자가 필요한 것처럼 보입니다.

그러나, 저작권 침해 논란 투성이인 프로젝트와 대부분 부재중인 현지 공동체는, 특히 이 프로젝트에 관심이 없거나, 관심을 아직 보여주지 않은 한국어 공동체는 어느 곳 하나 필요하지 않습니다.

2019년에 만들어진 딱 한 문서를 찾아냈는데,(n:ko:캐나다 인권운동가에 대한 왁싱 거부 논란) 완전하지만, 단독 보도는 아닙니다. 지난 해에 생성된 다른 문서는 없고, 최근에 보도된 한 2019년 기사는 세지 않았습니다.(또한 저작권 침해 논란이 있습니다.)

(George Ho 사용자가 작성한 글을 Garam이 번역함.)

추신, 다시는 장문을 번역하고 싶지 않습니다. --Garam talk 10:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


Support 찬성[edit]

  1. I've been cleaning up kowikinews for last 6 years (since around December 2013), and I agree shutdown is the correct things to do. (Minor correction: Sotiale, who took the Steward-y office few weeks ago, is Korean speaker.) — regards, Revi 14:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
    There has been quite a few alternatives for Wikinews (like, OhMyNews) who actually pays the reporters, so there is less incentive for join Wikinews when you have a site where you can do 'citizen journalism' and actually get paid as well. — regards, Revi 14:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
    If the LangCom, WikimediaWikipedia Korea (the chapter - I'm being sarcastic) or the Korean Wikipedia rejects the closure, YOU will have to take responsibility to maintain the site, because I will immediately resign from my kowikinews admin position and will not care about the wiki unless asked on SRM. — regards, Revi 11:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
    한국 위키미디어백과 협회든, 한국어 위키백과든, 언어위원회든, 한국어 위키뉴스를 닫지 않겠다면 위키뉴스의 유지보수에 책임을 져야 할 것입니다. 이 프로젝트가 닫히지 않는 것으로 결정나면 즉시 관리자 권한 반납하고 SRM에서 요청되기 전에는 건드리지도 않을 거니까요. — regards, Revi 11:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
    Well no, the attention of Korean Wikipedians are beyond my availability and the stress level I can endure. I resigned. Good luck. — regards, Revi 15:07, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  2. Kowikinews had now became a haven for spambots, LTAs as well as vandals. The copyvio issue notwitstanding, we cannot have a project without any local community (the only sysop had admitted he is too busy to handle day-to-day basis work there - though he is quite responsive to my pings when I need a page there deleted :)), and no positive contributions in a year. I will say let's not overload -revi and Sotiale with the very demanding work of copyvio, and hence, I will prefer a hard closure. I don't think moving to incubator will do any justice, as then the copyvio issue will then be thrown to incubator and someone have to resolve the issue. It's sad as -revi pointed out the case of OhMyNews, volunteers are harder and harder to recruit and retain, where there are places where the same time and content they produce will be having tangible rewards. Let's not waste what precious volunteer time we have, the SRM threads of copyvio should stop for kowikinews. Regretful support,--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:44, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
    Pages till 2015-2016 are generally fine, when I had quite more passion about Wikinews in general. So contents back to Incubator might be fine. — regards, Revi 16:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    @-revi: I see, then let's move the good versions (maybe till 2016) to incubator. I just don't wish the copyvio problem being moved over to SRM (this time incubator version). Though I note that incubator have more sysops which can deal with copyvio, but an issue is that there aren't ko speaking sysop at incubator (or am I wrong), so the issue might end up at SRM again.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    I am test-sysop for Wy/ko so in theory I can perform deletion on Wn/ko (or I can simply ask admins to delete this, this, that, that, pages) on incubator. — regards, Revi 16:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    @-revi: I didn't know that, okay, then a move back to incubator will be fine. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:20, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
  3. Support --RoBG97MEX (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
    If you can provide rationale for your vote, that would be more helpful. George Ho (talk) 21:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
  4. I've been contributed on there until 2014 including had an adminship. With the seeing patterns of Korean jourlism that keep copying or using similar resources each other, I will see there will be consistent copyvio issues when project is remain open, Even this project could be more active by community support. Therefore closure may be better option unfortunately. --*Youngjin (talk) 22:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
    I still in support position as I stated, while I am waiting more activities if LangCom implementing sofe-closure. --*Youngjin (talk) 07:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
    Strongly agree.--(I changed my mind.)Kenlee77 (talk) 03:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
  5. Agree with hard closure like Bulgarian. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
  6. 인큐베이터에 있을 때부터 활동적인 사용자의 수가 불분명한 상황이었음에도, 인큐베이터로부터 위키뉴스라는 새로운 프로젝트를 꺼내온 것부터가 문제였습니다. 그리고 흥미롭게도, 과거에도 지금도 다들 누군가 대신 기여하기를 바랄 뿐, 직접 나서고자 하지는 않습니다. 물론, 지금 이러한 계기로 흥미가 생겨서 기여하는 사람들이 있지만, 항상 그래왔듯이 프로젝트가 살아남는다고 한들 그리 오래가지는 못할 겁니다. 그리고 소수의 사용자들만이 기여하는 자매 프로젝트들의 미래도 이와 같을 겁니다. 이는 ‘한국위키백과협회’가 손 쓸 새도 없이 말입니다. --Garam talk 02:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
  7. I see no need to keep it open. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
  8. Aside from the problems of Wikimedia Korea biased by Korean Wikipedia, Korean Wikinews had many internal and external problems. Due to other alternative wiki sites and media press, it has been neglected due to the lack of interest from users. Also, there have been frequent requests to delete posts that violate copyrights. --관인생략 (talk) 02:23, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
    FYI, there is an opinion among Korean Wikipedians that it is necessary to redefine the scope of Wikipedia in order not to bite newcomers out of other non-active sister projects. --관인생략 (talk) 13:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
  9. 여태 보다 더 노력을 들인다 하여, 그것만으로 이 프로젝트가 나아질 수 있는지에는 여전히 의문이 듭니다.--Exj (talk) 03:05, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
  10. Not enough activity. --Jnovikov (talk) 06:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
  11. GA candidate.svg Weak support 119.243.200.107 03:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
  12. Support, or, at the very least, put it back in the Incubator until interest from sources that aren't spambots or plagarizers is indicated. Korean Wikinews seems to be all downside with no actual journalism going on at the moment. Full disclosure: I would also support separating Wikinews (in general, all language editions) from Wikimedia entirely as not compatible with the project, even when a specific Wikinews edition is active and successful, but that's not even the case here. SnowFire (talk) 18:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Oppose 반대[edit]

  1. Obviously, some of the related news sites in Korean are better known and have more participants than Wikinews. But "completely open to everyone" is not common. Through consultation with Wikimedia Korea, we would like to find ways to run an honorary press corps.--Trainholic (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
  2. Korean Wikinews has many articles. --Kulgai (talk) 04:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    The main issue is not the amount of articles but the article quality and potential risk of infringing intellectual properties of others. George Ho (talk) 06:05, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
  3. I think that the problem is Wikinews project itself, rather than a single project. - Ellif (talk) 13:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    Shouldn't your comment belong to either "Support", "Neutral" or "Discussion" section, Ellif? It doesn't seem like a rationale for opposing this proposal, is it? George Ho (talk) 20:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    Yes. Shut down just one sub-project of a non-sustainable project, is not economic. - Ellif (talk) 21:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    If you believe that Wikinews sites are non-sustainable, then why not just propose closing down all of Wikinews? How does leaving Korean Wikinews open solve your issues with Wikinews generally? What are your alternative proposals for Wikinews? George Ho (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    Why I have to make the worthless work for you? I must do many things ahead of 'the propose', and I do not want to be an enemy of other wikimedians who works for Wikinews. - Ellif (talk) 06:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
    I'm not trying to make you do the work, but then I see you interpret my questions as if I wanted you to. If I did, then I apologize. BTW, to answer your question you made at #Discussion (though I was using Google Translate to know what you were saying), LangCom has been apparently reluctant to close one project, even if inactive, for multiple reasons, like technical hassle and all that. The list of proposals, including rejected ones, would help you understand why, I hope. The closure policy also helps answer your question. Some of Wikinews sites are soft-closed, i.e. not locked, yet a banner indicating inactivation can be shown to users, like Greek and Norwegian Wikinews. As for closing just "Korean Wikinews", as explained at #Proposal rationale, the ko.wn has tons of issues, like Bulgarian WN, which was hard-closed months ago, one year after the proposal was made. George Ho (talk) 07:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
  4. 80M peoples speak Korean as their first language. We should not close Wikimedia Project which language has large native spekers. --Sharouser (talk) 13:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    But who contributes to Wikinews? Nobody. Why should it be left open? — regards, Revi 15:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
    Here are last year's stats (daily avg. 1,000+) and this year's, including last 90 days. Out of 80 million, the percentage is less than 0.005% every day. George Ho (talk) 22:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
  5. Oppose --Gunofficial1998 (talk) 11:56, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
    May you please explain your vote? That would be more helpful to others. Thanks. George Ho (talk) 13:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
  6. Oppose - PlavorSeol (T | C) 18:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
    Seeing your hidden comment, I'm trying to find a good-faith way to reply to that. Unfortunately, the tone comment itself you made or the way it is written either tries to make me look bad to those opposing this proposal, makes good faith less possible, or looks as if you intended to discourage others from responding to or challenging your vote. If neither is the case, then I don't know how else to politely respond to the hidden comment. --George Ho (talk) 02:09, 23 March 2020 (UTC); edited, 02:54, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
    The above user is globally banned per Meta RFC discussion. For the record, I recently found out the user's past history. George Ho (talk) 05:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
    Oppose There is a volunteer who want to manage and improve Korean Wikinews. --참보수 (talk) 06:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
    The above user's account is globally locked as LTA user, so I'm striking out the above vote as invalid. George Ho (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
  7. before closing, we have to do our best. not did yet. --거북이 (talk) 01:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
  8. I started making news for wikinews recently. I am ready for dedicating my talent. 웬디러비 (talk) 06:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
  9. Oppose on the grounds of software being developed (by me) at English Wikinews to make news authoring a lot easier. I hope this can be deployed to Korean Wikinews, and improve the quality as well as quantity of the output. It is in beta stages, but I already have interest in it from Ukrainian and Russian Wikinews at the moment. --Gryllida 06:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC) P.S. To address copyrights, they can use some form of review, possibly assisted with FlaggedRevs; see how English Wikinews and Russian Wikinews does this. There are solutions for this so long there is a volunteer who can do checks 30 mins per week. I hope on-wiki external links spam is not a problem, as that'd need ongoing attention from a sysop. --Gryllida 07:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
    @Gryllida: My comment probably does not belong here, but since this page is attracting so few, I'll go ahead and make it. You are talking about a volunteer willing to put in 30 minutes per week to root out vandalism, and I am sure there many vandal fighters around wmf-sites willing to do this kind of work. Unfortunately the wmf has not figured out how to channel these individuals to areas of building content, sigh... Ottawahitech (talk) 16:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
    Fixed indentation and numbering. George Ho (talk) 22:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
    I'm interested in that tool. Could you give more details at Here? --Trainholic (talk) 17:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
    @Gryllida: I'm afraid that FlaggedRevs is no longer possible to install on a new requested project, maybe try Huggle instead? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:38, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
    Oppose It's normal that no one contributes to a small wiki. --Kitabc12345 (talk) 18:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Neutral 중립[edit]

  1. Citizen journalism maybe the silver bullet for this wiki project, but I'm still against the hard closing proposed here due to technical hassle it may cause.--AldnonymousBicara? 21:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
  2. I'm not really fond of closing a project with a large number of speakers. Perhaps merge it into ko.wiki instead? Minorax (talk) 06:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
    Minorax, I'm not sure with merging Wikinews to Wikipedia though, care to elaborate?--AldnonymousBicara? 10:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
    @Aldnonymous: It's like having a new namespace for the content in Wikinews to be in Wikipedia. This allows the current sysops of ko.wiki to "look after" wikinews within the boundaries of wikipedia. A similar request for sco.wikipedia to import their wiktionary (which is currently in incubator). Minorax (talk) 12:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
    Note: Bavarian Wikipedia is an example that their Wikinews is located wp-locally, and especially, Alemannic Wikipedia serves many other Wikimedia projects (de facto except Wikiversity, I don't know why). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:07, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
    Merging into ko.wiki sounds enticing. Is there a downside? For example can the two category systems co-exist, etc. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:30, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
    I believe that merging into ko.wiki (or Incubator) would not prevent others from copying materials of third-party sources. George Ho (talk) 01:55, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  3. Recently, Ko-wikinews is reviving. However it should make reporters' next generations.--Kenlee77 (talk) 10:38, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
  4. It's normal for no one to contribute to the small wiki, copyvio issues? Okay, so back to incubator would be nice. --Kitabc12345 (talk) 19:04, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • Plea Please don't close/delete any news page while COVID-19 is still a worldwide issue. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:31, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
    • @Ottawahitech: What does COVID had to do with this, kowikinews don't have too many COVID news article and we aren't deleting, just moving it to incubator.Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
      • @Camouflaged Mirage: I believe that this is the wrong time to close a project that may have been idle for ten years but since South Korea has been in the news a lot recently, it may give it a push. Am making sense?Ottawahitech (talk) 14:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

여기에서 한국 위키미디어 협회 활동에 대해서 논의가 되고 있는 것이 유감스럽습니다. 한국 위키미디어 협회는 자매 프로젝트를 지원하기 위해서 꾸준한 노력을 하였으나 불행히도 공용에서의 활동(공모전이나 위키탐방 등) 이외는 결과가 좋지 못했습니다. 사실 작년에는 한 도서관에 위키문헌 협업을 제의하였고, 다른 도서관에는 위키여행 협업을 제의하였으나 성사가 되지 않았습니다. 올해에는 다행히도 커뮤니티에서 자발적인 위키미디어 공용 에디터톤이 개최되어 지원해 드릴 수 있었습니다. 다만 위키뉴스의 경우에는 그 동안 커뮤니티 활동이 전무하여 자발적인 에디터톤 지원은 생각할 수 없었고, 다른 외부 단체와의 콜라보레이션도 생각하기가 어려웠던 점을 고려해 주시길 바랍니다. --Motoko C. K. (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

참고로 위키탐방도 공용과 위키백과 두 프로젝트에서 동시에 작업하는 프로그램입니다. 제가 평가하기로는 위키탐방의 성과는 나쁘지 않았다고 생각합니다. --Motoko C. K. (talk) 19:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

(Rough English translation) I am sorry that I heard about Wikimedia Korea here. Wikimedia Korea is trying to support for sister wikimedia projects. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a dominant encyclopedia, and free knowledge movement is still uncommon in South Korea. In this situation, promoting Wikimedia sister projects is much harder than promoting Wikipedia. In spite of it, we proposed cooperation projects for Wikimedia Commons, Wikisource and Wikivoyage to some libraries last year, but they didn't answered. Wikinews doesn't have any active users, so we could not support any voluntary meetups or plan any cooperation projects. Motoko C. K. (talk) 19:36, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

그리고 협회는 원칙적으로 자발적인 활동을 지원하는 단체입니다. 자발적인 활동이 없는 프로젝트를 지원하는 것은 매우 어렵고 유저들이 관심이 없으면 모두 단기적인 활동으로 끝나게 됩니다. 현재 협회가 위키백과나 공용에서 하고 있는 활동도 모두 자발적인 편집자(특히 오프 모임 지원)가 있기에 가능한 프로젝트입니다.

(Rough English translation) Wikimedia Korea mainly supports volunteers' activities, so it is really HARD to plan some programs without the volunteers. In other words, most of WMKR's actives for Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons would be impossible if there are not active users in the projects. --Motoko C. K. (talk) 20:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
You have changed your words, director? And I really wonder where this prize is now? --Garam talk 02:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
A sysop deleted a sentence accusing me on your user page. :) Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat#Request to block User:Garam and delete his user page Motoko C. K. (talk) 06:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Above is my personal opinion, and it's not Wikimedia Korea's official statement. --Motoko C. K. (talk) 20:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

당장 저 역시도 2012년부터 6년간, 2018년부터 1년간 생업에 치이느라 위키뉴스에 기고를 하지 못한 부분에 대해서는 아쉽습니다. 나름 제 이름을 건 블로그도 제대로 관리하지 못하는 불성실함의 소치를 이해해주셨으면 합니다. 최소한, 이번 토론에서 유지 측으로 결론이 난다면 적어도 최소한은 유지가 될 수 있도록 생업에 임하듯 힘을 쓸 수 있도록 하겠습니다. 그런 의미에서 ko:n:위키뉴스:관리자 선거/trainholic 역시 열었습니다. revi께서 이야기했던대로 위키뉴스가 유지로 결론이 난다면, 프로젝트가 유지되고 힘을 쓰려면 어떤 일을 해야 하나 고민하면서 관리자직을 수행토록 하겠습니다.

폐쇄에 대한 이야기까지 나온 데 있어, 무려 6년간 이곳에서의 기여를 내팽겨친 제 부덕을 용서해주시기 바랍니다. 누군가나 어떤 공동체가 서로를 탓하는 언쟁보다는, '현직자라는 놈께서 자투리 하나 기여하지 못했냐'라는 말을 제게 해주시기를 부탁드립니다. --Trainholic (talk) 03:06, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

해당 선거의 피선거권과 관련하여 의견을 남겼습니다. 확인 바랍니다. --Garam talk 03:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
  • 일단 협회이야기느 뒤로 재쳐두고 왜 한국어 위키뉴스가 유지됨에 따른 문제점은 무엇이고 왜 폐쇄되어야 하는지 부터 짚어야 한다고 생각합니다. 우선적으로 제가 언급하는 바는 한국어 위키뉴스 내에서의 지속적인 저작권 침해 발생 및 악의적 기사들에 대한 관리 부재 등의 사유로 폐쇄에 찬성하는 바입니다. 자매프로젝트에 한국 위키미디어협회던 위키백과협회던 어떠한일을 하는지에 대한 토론울 하는 장소가 아니지 않습니까(물론 공용을 제외한 다른 자매 프로젝트에서 활동이 부족하다는 점은 인지합니다) 일단 둘째치고 말이죠. 일단 관련된 발언은 이 곳에서는 멈춰주셨으면 좋겠네요--*Youngjin (talk) 04:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
  • We are here to discuss closure of Korean wikinews, In order to consideration is Not appealing the problems of weather called as Wikimedia Korea or Wikipedia Chapter in Korea. I support the closure because of consistent copyright violation as well as created scam article for hate-speech, that's main reason other than lack of administrative activities at there. Yes, I am aware that WM/WPKR's activities are mainly happening in Korean Wikipedia and not seeing in the sister projects. But please try to focus the discussion towards Korean Wikinews itself, but not WM/WPKR. --*Youngjin (talk) 04:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

위키뉴스는 비단 한국어뿐만 아니라 글로벌에서 그리 성공적이지 않은 프로젝트이고 그것엔 나름 이유가 있습니다. 다루는 소재가 위키시스템과 그리 어울리지 않습니다. 뉴스는 시간이 지나면 그리 의미가 없는 옛날 이야기가 될뿐입니다. 위키시스템은 촌각을 다투는 일을 다루기엔 너무 느긋한 시스템이고요. 게다가 한국어 위키뉴스와 같이 사용자가 극히 적다면 한 두명의 열성으로 해결하기엔 시스템 유지가 안됩니다. 관리의 문제는 부차적이라고 생각해요. 트레인홀릭님의 열성은 높이사지만, 안타깝게도 지금의 상황에선 폐지가 맞다고 생각하고요. 하지만, 위의 토론 과정에서 보이는 사람과 단체에 대한 비방은 영진님 말씀처럼 주제에서 벗어난 이야기라고 생각합니다. -- Jjw (talk) 05:11, 23 March 2020 (UTC) Wikinews is not successful project neither in Korean language nor the global situation. There is reasonable cause that the subject is not suit with wiki system. News would become the meaningless old story through time flow, and wiki system is too slow to handle the emergent issue. Plus, Korean wikinews has few users to maintain itself, so there is no way to solve the problem with the hard effort of several active users. I think that administration is not major issue on this issue. I count on Trainholic's passion, but unfortunately, it is time to close. However, the discussion attitude whose show the blames to personal or organization is out of subject as saying as Youngjin above. -- Jjw (talk) 05:11, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

모두 차분하게 읽기는 어려워서 의견을 간단하게 달아둡니다.

  1. 한국어 위키뉴스에 대한 지원이 적었고 지금상태라면 폐쇄가 맞아보입니다. I'm agree with closing wikinews Korea, until now.
  2. 하지만 폐쇄했다가 또 여는 것도 일이므로 살려보려는 노력은 필요합니다. But we must do our best. We don't want to do regret.
  3. 그 노력으로 저는 복수의 대학신문사 기자들과의 협업시도를 제안합니다. So my suggestion is co-work with collage news / journals.
  4. 위키뉴스에 대한 책임, 지금까지 뭐했느냐는 힐난 한국 위키미디어협회나 사랑방 등에 대한 언급은 이 논의와는 무관합니다. And we don't have to blame each other.

--거북이 (talk) 00:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

추가적으로 언급하나만 하자면, 현재까지 위키뉴스를 유지하려고 시도하신 분이 없는 것으로 보였으나, 현 시점에서 위키뉴스를 활성화 시킨다는 의지가 있는 분이 나타나서 본 토론 종료 이전에 어느정도 활동적으로 바뀐다면 프로젝트 유지하자고 결정한다면 이에대한 이견이 없습니다. 다만 이와는 별도로 저의 의견은 변동되지 않을 것임을 밝힙니다.--*Youngjin (talk) 05:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

위키뉴스의 폐쇄 토론이 다행히도 꺼져가던 불길에 연료를 충전해주었네요. 현재 위키뉴스는 하루에 한 건 이상의 기사가 올라올 정도로 제 궤도에 들어왔습니다. 이대로의 추세라면 관리자 권한을 갖게 될 사용자도 나올 것이고, 총의에 따라 사무관의 지위를 얻는 사용자도 나오리라고 생각됩니다. 더욱이, 현재 언론사에서도 위키뉴스와의 제휴를 위해 기사를 중복송고하는 등 프로젝트가 엔진을 다시 가동하고 있는 모습입니다. 한국어판 위키뉴스에서 관리자가 두 명 이상 선출되면, 상기하신 '관리가 어려우며 저작권 침해에 대응하지 못할 것'이라는 논거도 깨지게 됩니다. 그렇게 될 때, 해당 토론을 마무리 짓는 것으로 하죠. 어떨까요? --Trainholic (talk) 08:54, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

에이, 장기적으로 과연 얼마나 남아있는지 봐야죠. 단 1달 가지고 뭘 결정해요. — regards, Revi 10:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
그리고 요청의 처리사항은 언어위원회 소관이지 귀하가 결정할 일이 아니죠. — regards, Revi 10:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
여긴 한국어 위키백과나 로컬 커뮤니티가 아닙니다. 관리자가 판단하는 것이 아닙니다.--*Youngjin (talk) 06:55, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe WNExit?[edit]

i.e. Like how Brexit is like, found a "Wikinews Foundation", deploy servers separately and finally, sing Ode to Joy and finalize splittion of Wikinews from Wikimedia Foundation? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@George Ho and Ellif: Is this way okay for you both? If the entire Wikinews are problems? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:13, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
I'd love to discuss all of Wikinews, Liu先生, but I don't think this page is the right place. Why not propose "WNExit" at RFC instead? That way, this page should primarily focus on ko.WN. Well, we can have closure of ko.WN and WNExit proposed concurrently and separately. George Ho (talk) 20:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Sororicide against Wikinews —which is nakedly what you're talking about— would be the beginning of the end for the entire sisterhood. I've seen plants killed, that way, from continuous overpruning; pieces get lopped off because they're smaller, and the remaining plant gets weaker and weaker, unable to sustain itself without the support of the lost pieces that the pruner thought weren't needed, till it withers and dies. --Pi zero (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Overzealous plant pruning is a great analogy! Ottawahitech (talk) 21:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)