Jump to content

Migration of Wikinews and future hosts

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from MIGRWN)
Shortcut:
MIGRWN

This page serves as a central discussion hub for different Wikinews language communities regarding the possible migration of Wikinews projects to alternative hosting environments, such as community self-hosting or third-party wiki farms like Miraheze.

A current proposal is joint stewardship and hosting by Wikimedia New York City and Miraheze. This would include new approaches such as Wikinews Pulse and new concepts suggested on some of the active Wikinews languages.

(om) Haareffama Barbaachiseera!
Fuulli kun daddafee haaromfamuu barbaachisa. Ragaan qooqa keessaniin jiru kan haareffame haa ta'u!
(am) እድሳት አስፈልጓል!
ይህ ገፅ ቶሎ ቶሎ መታደስ ያስፈልገዋል። በቋንቋዎት ያለው መረጃ የታደሠ ይሁን!
(ar) مطلوب التحديث!
هذه الصفحة بحاجة أن يقوم أحد بتحديثها بشكل دائم!. حافظ على البيانات في لغتك محدثة!
(ast) ¡Actualización necesaria!
Esta páxina ha ser actualizada davezu. ¡Caltén al día los datos de la to llingua!
(az) Yeniləmə tələb edilir!
Bu səhifənin müntəzəm olaraq yenilənməsi lazımdır. Zəhmət olmasa, sizin dil versiyanızın aktual olmasına nəzarət edin!
(bg) Необходима е актуализация!
Тази страница трябва да се актуализира често. Актуализирайте данните за вашия език!
(bn) হালনাগাদ প্রয়োজন!
এই পৃষ্ঠাটি সবসময় হালনাগাদকৃত রাখা বাঞ্ছনীয়। আপনার ভাষার জন্য তথ্যটি হালনাগাদকৃত রাখুন!
(br) Poent eo hizivaat!
Ezhomm zo freskaat danvez ar bajenn-mañ ingal. Trugarez da nevesaat ar roadennoù a sell ouzh ho yezh deoc'h!
(ca) Actualització necessària!
Aquesta pàgina ha de ser actualitzada freqüentment. Mantingueu al dia les dades en el vostre idioma!
(cs) Nutná aktualizace!
Tuto stránku je třeba často aktualizovat. Udržujte data pro váš jazyk aktuální!
(da) Manuel opdatering!
Denne side opdateres manuelt. Hold venligst alle data, der angår dit sprog, opdateret.
(de) Aktualisierung notwendig!
Diese Seite muss regelmäßig aktualisiert werden. Halte die Daten für deinen Sprachraum auf dem neuesten Stand!
(el) Απαιτείται αναβάθμιση!
Αυτή η σελίδα χρειάζεται να ενημερώνεται συχνά. Κρατήστε τα δεδομένα για την γλώσσα σας ενημερωμένα!
(en) Update required!
This page needs to be frequently updated. Keep the data for your language up to date!
(es) ¡Actualización requerida!
Esta página necesita ser actualizada frecuentemente. ¡Mantenga los datos de su idioma actualizados!
(eo) Ĝisdatigo nepras!
Tiu ĉi paĝo bezonas regulan ĝisdatigon. Tenu la datumojn por via lingvo ĝisdataj!
(eu) Eguneratzea beharrezkoa da!
Orri hau maiz eguneratu behar da. Zure hizkuntzako datuak eguneratuta mantendu!
(fa) نیازمند به‌روزرسانی!
این صفحه گهگاه نیازمند به‌روزرسانی‌است. اطلاعات زبان خود را بروز نگه دارید!
(fi) Päivitystä tarvitaan!
Tätä sivua täytyy päivittää säännöllisesti. Pidäthän omaa kieltäsi koskevat tiedot ajan tasalla!
(fr) Mise à jour demandée !
Cette page a besoin d'être fréquemment mise à jour. Merci de maintenir à jour les informations concernant votre langue !
(gl) Requírese unha actualización!
Esta páxina necesita ser actualizada frecuentemente. Manteña os datos da súa lingua actualizados!
(gsw) Aktualisierig notwändig!
Die Syte muess regelmäßig aktualisiert wäre. Halt die Date fir Dyy Sprochruum uf em nejschte Stand!
(hi) अद्यतन चाहिए!
इस पृष्ठ पर निरन्तर अद्यतन की आवश्यकता है। अपनी भाषा के लिए डेटा अद्यतित रखें!
(hr) Potrebno ažuriranje!
Ova stranica mora se redovito aktualizirati. Redovito unosite najnovije promjene!
(hu) Frissítendő!
Ezt a listát sűrűn kell ellenőrizni, hogy aktuális maradjon. A frissítéshez minden segítség jól jön!
(hy) Թարմացման պահանջա՛րկ
Այս էջը հաճախակի թարմացման կարիք ունի։ Ձեր լեզվով տվյալները թարգմացրե՛ք։
(id) Pembaruan diperlukan!
Halaman ini perlu diperbarui dari waktu ke waktu. Pastikan data dalam bahasa Anda tetap mutakhir!
(it) Aggiornamento necessario!
Questa pagina necessita di frequenti aggiornamenti. Mantieni aggiornati i dati riguardanti la tua lingua!
(ja) 更新が必要です
このページは常時更新されています。このページのあなたの言語のバージョンの更新にご協力ください。
(jv) Perlu dianyari!
Kaca iki perlu dianyari saben wektu, supaya data ing basa panjenengan tetep sing paling anyar!
(ka) განახლების საჭირობა!
ეს გვერდი ყოველდღიურად უნდა ახლდებოდეს. შემოიტანეთ მიმდინარე დღის მონაცემები თქვენი ენისათვის!
(km) ភាពទាន់សម័យ ត្រូវការជាចាំបាច់!
ទំព័រនេះត្រូវការការធ្វើឲ ទាន់សម័យជាញឹកញាប់។ សូមចូលរួមរក្សាទិន្នន័យ នៃភាសារបស់អ្នក អោយរក្សាភាពទាន់សម័យ!
(kk) Жаңартуды қажет етеді!
Бұл бет жиі жаңатып тұруды қажет етеді. Өз тіліңізге қатысты деректерді жаңартыңыз!
(ko) 갱신이 필요합니다.
이 문서는 자주 갱신되어야 합니다. 당신의 언어에 관한 정보를 갱신해주세요.
(ku) Rojanekirin Hewce ye!
Hewce ye ku ev rûpel hertim bê rojanekirin. Agahiyên derbarê zimanê xwe rojane bikin.
(lt) Reikalingas atnaujinimas!
Šiam puslapiui reikia dažno atnaujinimo. Atnaujinkite savo kalbos duomenis!
(lv) Nepieciešama atjaunināšana !
Šai lapai jātiek regulāri atjaunotai! Uzturi savas valodas datus jaunus!
(mg) Mila havaozina!
Mila havaozina matetika ity pejy ity. Misaotra anao manavao ny fampahalalana mahakasika ny fiteninao!
(mk) Потребна е поднова!
На страницава ѝ треба често подновување. Редовно внесувајте ги најновите податоци за вашиот јазик!
(ms) Pembaharuan diperlukan!
Laman ini perlu diperbaharui dari masa ke semasa. Pastikan data dalam bahasa anda adalah yang terkini!
(mt) Aġġornament neċessarju!
Din il-paġna għandha bżonn ta' aġġornamenti frekwenti. Żomm aġġornati d-dati li jitrattaw il-lingwa tiegħek!
(new) अपडेट माःगु!
थ्व पौ याकनं-याकनं हे अपडेट यायेमा। छिगु थःगु भाषाया डेटा अप टु डेट तयादिसँ!
(nl) Update nodig!
Deze pagina moet vaak worden bijgewerkt met nieuwe informatie. Zorg er voor dat de informatie voor uw taal geactualiseerd blijft!
(nb) Oppdatering trengs!
Denne siden trenger å bli oppdatert ofte. Hold dataen for dikbd språk oppdatert!
(oc) Mesa a jorn requesa!
Aquesta pagina a besonh d'èsser frequentament mesa a jorn. Mercés de manténer a jorn las informacions que concernisson vòstra lenga !
(pl) Wymagana aktualizacja!
Ta strona wymaga częstej aktualizacji. Postaraj się, aby dane dla Twojego języka były zawsze aktualne!
(pt) Atualização requisitada!
Esta página necessita ser frequentemente atualizada. Mantenha os dados de sua língua atualizados!
(ro) Actualizare necesară!
Această pagină trebuie să fie actualizată frecvent. Vă mulţumim pentru păstrarea informaţiilor la zi în limba dumneavoastră!
(ru) Требуется обновление!
Эта страница нуждается в регулярном обновлении. Пожалуйста, следите, чтобы содержание вашей языковой версии было актуально!
(sh) Potrebno ažuriranje!
Ova stranica se mora često ažurirati. Redovito ažurirajte podatke za vaš jezik!
(sl) Potrebno posodabljanje!
To stran je potrebno redno posodabljati. Naj bodo podatki v vašem jeziku aktualni!
(sr) Потребно је ажурирање!
Ова страница мора редовно да се ажурира. Нека подаци који се односе на ваш језик увек буду ажурни!
(su) Perlu dibebenah!
Kaca ieu kudu dimutahirkeun unggal waktuna. Pastikeun data dina basa Anjeun tetep panganyarna!
(sv) Uppdatering nödvändig!
Den här sidan behöver uppdateras ofta. Håll informationen för dikbd språk uppdaterad!
(syl) ꠀꠙꠒꠦꠐ ꠖꠞꠇꠣꠞ ꠫
ꠁ ꠙꠣꠔꠣꠁꠈꠣꠘ ꠢꠇ꠆ꠇꠟꠛꠣꠟꠣ ꠀꠙꠒꠦꠐ ꠇꠞꠣ ꠖꠞꠇꠣꠞ ⁕ ꠀꠙꠘꠣꠞ ꠜꠣꠡꠣꠞ ꠟꠣꠉꠤ ꠔꠂꠔ꠆ꠔ ꠀꠙꠒꠦꠁꠐꠇꠞꠤ ꠞꠣꠈꠂꠘ ꠫
(ta) புதுப்பித்தல் தேவைப்படுகிறது!
இந்தப் பக்கமானது அடிக்கடி புதுப்பிக்கப்பட வேண்டியது. உமது மொழிக்கான தரவை நிகழ்காலத்திற்கு அமைய வைத்திருக்கவும்!
(th) ช่วยกันปรับปรุงข้อมูล!
หน้านี้ต้องมีการปรับปรุงข้อมูลบ่อยครั้ง ช่วยกันปรับปรุงข้อมูลเกี่ยวกับภาษาของท่านให้เป็นข้อมูลล่าสุดอยู่เสมอ!
(tr) Güncelleme Gerekiyor!
Bu sayfanın sıklıkla güncellenmesi gerekmektedir. Dilinize ait bilgileri güncel tutunuz.!
(vi) Cần cập nhật!
Trang này cần được thường xuyên cập nhật. Hãy luôn giữ cho dữ liệu tại ngôn ngữ của bạn được cập nhật!
(zh) 更新请求！
这个页面需要经常更新，以及时维护你的语言的数据！
The purpose of this page is to
  • Consolidate currently scattered discussions across various Wikinews projects
  • Provide a space for continued discussion after Wikinews sites become read-only (expected from May 4)
  • Explore whether migration is feasible and desired by the communities
  • Facilitate structured discussion on potential migration plans, including: Technical considerations, Licensing and content reuse, Clarification regarding the use of the Wikinews trademark from the Wikimedia Foundation

(This page is intended to remain neutral and community-driven only, and does not advocate for any specific outcome.)

Current Updates

[edit]

Stewardship by Wikimedia NYC

[edit]
  • 01-04-2026: There are early-stage discussions ongoing between Wikimedia NYC and members of the Sister Projects Task Force about the possible joint stewardship of Wikinews by Wikimedia New York City and Miraheze. -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 15:12, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Could I inquire whether these are public proceedings or if there are invitations for comments from the community? It would be strange if such discussions were not in the open. - Fuzheado (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, anything that has any use being public will be communicated as needed. Transparency is a core part of both the Wikimedia movement and Miraheze's approach. Individual matters between WM NYC, Miraheze's representative and Wikimedia are not being discussed in the open. RhinosF1 (talk) 17:21, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    But we should note that any use of the branding or name "Wikinews" after the project's closure should be discussed in public and in the open, since that name was created by the community and the reputation of the community is linked to that name. That should not be considered "individual matters." - Fuzheado (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, I don't disagree with that but there has to be something meaningful for the community to actually work with. RhinosF1 (talk) 20:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Regardless, I also support greater involvement from WMNYC, which will help maintain cooperation within our Wikimedia framework and benefit the Wikimedia movement as a whole. ~ Sheminghui.WUHappy Brithday ZHWN!(talk) 03:30, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RhinosF1, @Pharos — is there any update on the possibility of migration or a timeline for which you expect to know?
    Can we get a list of all people who are involved in discussions and what their roles are (from both WMF NY and Miraheze)?
    We are effectively back where we were with the WMF: no timeline, no clarity, and no basis upon which to plan. That leaves us choosing between a last-minute scramble to archive the project before going read-only or preparing for migration without knowing if it will happen. Meanwhile, some contributors are treating migration as a given, which shifts additional cleanup onto those trying to wind the project down responsibly now.
    Is the WMF considering a re-defined transition window—e.g., six weeks from a decision—rather than requiring migration to be completed by May 4?
    As it stands, the lack of transparency risks both the migration itself and whatever follows. Michael.C.Wright (talk) 14:04, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, Myself, Harej and Pharos are your main contacts. I am not aware of any plan from the Wikimedia Foundation to extend or adjust the deadline to migrate. Discussions are ongoing between Wikimedia Legal, Wikimedia NYC and Miraheze but I have nothing to report publicly yet. RhinosF1 (talk) 20:16, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you.
    I understand there are no updates yet on the migration decision.
    In the meantime, do you have any guidance on our current reliance on DPL? Was there any assumption/expectation/understanding on Miraheze’s side that the extension would be available and supported?
    We are working to reduce our use of it in preparation for a possible read-only transition, on the assumption that DPL will likely be disabled. Should we migrate, we would either need DPL to remain available in its current form or undertake a full update of existing calls to ensure compatibility with the new environment. Michael.C.Wright (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Morning, We offer both DPL (Wikimedia) and DPL4 (A Miraheze forked version of DPL). Any future Wikinews wiki would be welcome to install either of them and their syntax is compatible across both. RhinosF1 (talk) 06:23, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I wanted to share here an update on Suitable conditions for Wikinews Pulse as a continuation project being supported by Wikimedia NYC. Pharos (talk) 02:34, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    any updates? @Asked42, @Pharos BigKrow (talk) 19:28, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Existing Wikinews content and the risk of being deleted

[edit]
  • I hope this will not affect the at leastsoft-closed archival copies and our status within the WMF system(and users), as only in this way can we live up to the promises made to all contributors before today, who were contributing to Wikimedia.(Some of the people, especially many of the seniors at enwn, have even passed away!) Furthermore, this of course does not mean that I endorse the rationality and compliance of this closure decision. --Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:06, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I recently noticed a Phabricator task where it was mentioned that there is a possibility that all Wikinews sites' content could be deleted or removed. I am not sure about that, and I also don't know whether there is any real chance of it happening. But if there is a possibility that we could lose all current existing Wikinews sites to achieve the migration, I strongly oppose such a migration. Any clarification on this would be helpful.
    Also ping: @Sj: Thank you. -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 13:59, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I wonder if the assumption at Phabricator is that existing content is first migrated externally, then deleted locally. Michael.C.Wright (talk) 20:33, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    They should not be deleted locally. I'm not sure why someone suggested that in an unrelated ticket, but Wikimedia should ensure that long-term the existing Wikinews URLs will not break (including maintaining a read-only copy on Wikimedia servers). –SJ talk  17:51, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    All the comments on that phab task are by people who would not be making the decision. I would suggest trying to get an actually official comment from WMF. Most official comments seem to indicate content will be kept in a read-only state, but it would be good to get that confirmed. Even if kept read-only, I think there is a reasonable possibility DPL might be disabled, if so, perhaps replacing DPL usage with static lists would make sense before the closure, but it would be great to get a confirmation from WMF. Bawolff (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Great point user:Bawolff about making static lists for DPL. Worth its own ticket? We should have done this for Graphs before disabling it which would have improved the experience of roughly 200 million pageviews. –SJ talk  17:51, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, Graphs were intentionally bad because people were being POINTy about it as a pressure tactic. A ticket is usually meant as a way to get WMF's/dev's attention, but WMF is not going to convert the lists. It make more sense to organize on wiki probably. Bawolff (talk) 21:45, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T425261

[1] ^^ --~2026-23305-80 (talk) 05:19, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Quesotiotyo: Any ideas? ~2026-23305-80 (talk) 23:07, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand correctly, that information is on Wikidata, so we don't need to worry about it now; it can be fixed by Wikidata editors at any time after the closure. To the extent that Wikidata contains links to past Wikinews articles, those links should remain active since Wikinews is being made read-only; the existing Wikinews articles aren't being deleted. And to the extent that Wikidata contains data about Wikinews, the Wikidata editors can update their information using the "end date" property (or whatever property is most appropriate for this situation) to indicate that the project is closed. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:28, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Metropolitan90: Related Phabricator task tagged here. --~2026-23305-80 (talk) 03:49, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about Phabricator, but I'm not sure about the comment, "With [Wikinews] no longer being an official Wikimedia project, we should probably remove sitelinks (in the "In other projects" sidebar section) from view as a first step." It's not that Wikinews is no longer an official Wikimedia project, it's that Wikinews is no longer an active Wikimedia project. If the Foundation had wanted to disavow Wikinews entirely, they would have deleted the project rather than just closing it. If a link to a Wikinews article was valid before, it should still be valid now. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:33, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Or probably to just remove Wikinews supports by uninstalling WikibaseClient extensions from em? ~2026-23305-80 (talk) 11:40, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Metropolitan90. WN is no longer active, but it's still a WMF project. Infosfera (⁉️) 18:56, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That's true. ~ Sheminghui.WUHappy Brithday ZHWN!(talk) 03:22, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews as a separate namespace on Wikipedia?

[edit]

For the language edition of Wikipedia, there is the possibility of creating Wikinews as a separate namespace (as is done in the small language editions of Wikipedia, listed in Wikinews#Languages that use Wikipedia to serve their Wikinews). Don Stroud (talk) 07:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Neutral: it's a possibility, but must be definied if is a top-down uniform decision from WMF (as the closure of WN) or a full-local choice (potentially different in various wikis). Also a template of rules&policies from WMF (with advice of wikinews-involved people, please) to "paint" in local wikis is not to exclude to help this kind of operation . -- Infosfera (⁉️) 14:52, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WN logo discarded

[edit]

File:Wikimedia_logo_family_complete-2026.svg the WN logo was quietly removed... --Infosfera (⁉️) 15:19, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

German Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the German Wikinews (de.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@Aholtman, Ankermast, Conny, Itu, and Matthiasb: ^^ --~2026-20532-83 (talk) 06:54, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Add free would be a good point for me. Who is interested in hosting on a private server as an archive or could Wikimedia do a read only version? Conny (talk) 16:17, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Read-only version of the Wikinews would be kept in any case. Well very well (talk) 21:28, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds great. Conny (talk) 11:41, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure wether the already before not well functioning German WN community can recover enough to contribute in a mindful manner. I fear too much damage has occured. I would be glad to help but I don't think I will go back to those quota of former years. Matthiasb (talk) 20:20, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is difficult.
I have been a user on the German-language Wikinews for just under 21 years, of which I have spent more than 18 years as an administrator and more than 14.5 years as a bureaucrat. I became a user simply because I found the project interesting and also felt very welcome there. An administrator because User:Franz nominated me, not least because he believed I was technically capable and had the trust of all active contributors. A bureaucrat because the last bureaucrat had left the project and there was a consensus on various pages that we should have at least one. I was delighted to be able to do quite a bit within the project as an administrator with those additional rights. For me, it was never a form of power, but rather the use of rights that would serve the project without risking major vandalism.
Over the years, there have been periods of greater and lesser activity, not least because many people could only work on Wikinews as a hobby alongside their (often full-time – as in my case) employment, and there were relatively few of us. Had there been more of us, the burden would have been spread across more shoulders.
Various discussions both within and outside the project have not exactly helped things to improve.
I am not convinced that, with the current core group of active users, we can maintain the project effectively in its current form elsewhere. We have always been torn between producing high-quality articles and providing a less demanding option for users who cannot invest as much time but still wanted to contribute.
Best regards, Angela H. (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My mileage might be be slightly different, I got elected admin in a phase when I had to invite each and every active user to get a vote done, and I got three votes at the time. Writing circa 650 articles in about 18 years has not been enough, and even if my desillusement wasn't as bad as it was, sometimes, and I had added another 650 articles it won't have been enough. They wanted to kill the project for reasons we don't know, and they did it.
It is frustrating that we never got a real possibility to improve Wikinews, after this ill-fated consultation has started. They wanted to kill the project, and people recognized that. User activity in most of the languages faded very fast. I still don't know what the expectations of the WMF have been. They said that there has been little snyegy only. Well, maybe they really were believing that. But for me it didn't manifestate. Au contraire, I am doing less work at Wikipedia. Matthiasb (talk) 07:39, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]

English Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the English Wikinews (en.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines.

A related discussion page already exists on English Wikinews at n:Wikinews:Migration, where multiple viewpoints, including support and concerns regarding migration, have been raised. A brief summary of those discussions may be added here to support continuity.

Participants are invited to share their views on: Whether they support migration, Preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), Concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition.

Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]
  • Why are you voting here? Obviously the people interested in carrying on somewhere else will do so, and those who aren't won't. Voting about it is kind of pointless. Anyone who opposes simply won't participate. Bawolff (talk) 05:07, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Votes are meant to show whether there is interest and how many users are willing to contribute to the new host. At the very least, they can give an idea of whether migration is needed at all. But, your point is valid that users who oppose it may simply choose not to participate. My objective in structuring this page was to create a centralized place for discussion, with or without voting. -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 18:22, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with @Bawolff here. Any "vote" here will be a hyper-local form of consensus. That is, a false or useless consensus. In fact, the charge above says this is a "section is for discussing" possibilities, so I'm not sure what a "Support" vote even means. - Fuzheado (talk) 14:30, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    it helps to have all language contributors discuss on one page, then, they know what the other languages are planning to do or have already done. (the Discussions, that is. not necessarily the votes. that is in my view only a cosmetic change though) Gryllida 02:24, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Before voting, I would need more clarity from Wikimedia NY on what is meant by "stewarding," including whether this involves defined goals, a revised mission, and/or specific forms of support in reforming our processes and workflow.
    The SPTF report did not identify server infrastructure capacity as the primary reason for closure. Its summary of analysis listed in the following order:
  • Limited use to people
  • Usage is limited to a few countries
  • News coverage is not well-rounded
  • Low engagement
  • Community health: Low activity, lacking critical mass
  • Low synergy with other Wikimedia projects
Given that, it is not clear how a migration alone would address these concerns. How would this proposal meaningfully respond to the issues identified above? How do we avoid closure by Wikimedia NY in the future for similar reasons?
Who can we talk to at Wikimedia NY to understand their proposal? Michael.C.Wright (talk) 05:55, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging, @Pharos: -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 07:41, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Agree on this part – any effort MUST do better than the initial consultation back in 2004 (Wikinews/Vote) which had no plan at all, and was simply an expression of interest in trying something. We have a lot more knowledge about what didn't work out, and without critically addressing them, I can't see how anyone should support a reboot based in doing the same thing. - Fuzheado (talk) 14:45, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I personally would not label this migration as something like "reboot," "a new beginning," or "lets try from the start and fresh." In my mind, it is only a change of servers/hosts, if not, then it should be. Also, I don't think any discussion about how to increase the publication rate on Wikinews or other issues present on the project is totally unrelated to the approach to migration. To be honest, I personally don't find any link between them. -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 18:34, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael.C.Wright: Regarding "The SPTF report did not identify server infrastructure capacity as the primary reason for closure.": I don't think the migration is related to or a result of server capacity within Wikimedia. As I see it, the reason is that Wikinews is being closed under the WMF for the reasons provided by the SPTF, and the plan is to move to a new platform with permission from the WMF to continue using the Wikinews trademarks. Server infrastructure has not been presented as a reason for migration, or at least I have not noticed it.
Regarding the concerns you listed, I agree that those are valid concerns, and I don't see them being resolved under the new host in the foreseeable future. In fact, many users from Wikinews may not move to Miraheze, which could worsen community activity and these issues. That is indeed one of the strong reasons to oppose the migration. -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 18:44, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I posted this comment at n:Wikinews talk:Migration#c-Michael.C.Wright-20260406074500-Asked42-20260403182700 and am cross-posting here as well.
NotAracham stated; Miraheze would not impose a charge to act as host, but as a donor-driven platform, donations are always welcome to help us keep pace with expanding demand.
That reduces immediate financial pressure on any new organization. It does not address the more fundamental issue. Without the structural oversight and constraints provided by the Wikimedia Foundation, I do not see a viable path forward for en.WN. In its current state, the project has not demonstrated the capacity for consistent and productive self-regulation.
If Wikimedia NYC is to assume “stewardship” of Wikinews, that role needs to be clearly defined before any decision to migrate. Specifically, the scope of its authority, responsibilities, and limits should be made explicit to the community. It is also unclear how this arrangement would differ in practice from the current relationship with the Wikimedia Foundation, given that Wikimedia NYC is an affiliated chapter. Michael.C.Wright (talk) 07:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • The situation is very bad, but given where things stand, I personally do not oppose migration because website survival is better than extinction. However, I hope this will not affect the soft-closed archival copies and our status within the WMF system, as only in this way can we live up to the promises made to all contributors before today, who were contributing to Wikimedia.(Some of the people, especially many of the seniors at enwn, have even passed away!) After the migration, Wikinews will inevitably lose some of its sense of being an independent media outlet, and we can only hope to minimise these losses as much as possible.
Of course, this does not mean that I accept this closure decision which disregards the consultation and posted RfC results.
Additionally, under the above premises, I hope(If there are many language versions that deceid to be migrate) more language editions will follow so that we can continue to maintain our multilingual advantages and characteristics. I have been quite ill these past few days and have not carefully reviewed the discussion pages. Happy Easter to those who celebrate ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:05, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fandom.com hosts free wikis BigKrow (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@BigKrow I would love to suggest not to choose Fandom due to @Srapoj:'s behavior on here. ~2026-23305-80 (talk) 02:09, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What about WikiOasis? Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 12:12, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For those unfamiliar, WikiOasis is a farm operated by a number of users of various WMF projects, including @Justarandomamerican, @Zippybonzo, and myself. We are a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit. Illusion Flame (talk) 23:50, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I can confirm that I am indeed a Steward for that farm. Justarandomamerican (talk) 23:56, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Really cool. I wish we could actually take action already. Its been days but i dont know what are we waiting anymore. Somebody have to really start the initiative and become the leader instead of waiting everyone else to start the move.
I noticed several potential problem that makes people still in their wait and see mode. First, whether we can use the name "wikinews" outside the wikimedia movement. My suggestion is, it's safe to assume that it's not permissible. We can even start with temporary placeholder tentative name like news.wikioasis.org. we think and vote for new, better name later.
Second. Whether to import all the past wikinews article. My opinion is, someone should download the import first before we cant access it anymore. But we'll decide to whether upload it to new server or not.
Third. We urgently need to build a coordination group to build that new wiki. Preferably outside here. Telegram? Irc? Discord? Self-hosted Mattermost? Just choose.
Fourth. We should start collecting and publishing new news already, while also thinking some improvement to the past wikinews problems. We dont simply copy everything from wikinews, but should also make a significant improvement along the way.
So tldr : make news.wikioasis.org, make coordination group chat somewhere else, then start collecting and publishing new news. Rtnf (talk) 00:38, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. BigKrow (talk) 01:09, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Justin from Wikiversity is allowing news articles written there, I talked to him. Still in a WIP though stay updated! BigKrow (talk) 01:11, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf BigKrow (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I am personally fine with it, but I can't necessarily speak for the entire community. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:20, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in the process of requesting a WikiOasis wiki to host English Wikinews content. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 01:23, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Our staff has gone ahead and created the (currently unofficial) news.wikioasis.org. Feel free to begin contributing there, though, the wiki is entirely empty in its current state. Illusion Flame (talk) 01:23, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm willing to perform maintenance and install the necessary extensions for the wiki. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 01:25, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
How do I start a new news article on WikiOasis News? @Codename Noreste @Illusion Flame BigKrow (talk) 01:39, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Let's discuss it together here Rtnf (talk) 01:54, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
k. BigKrow (talk) 01:55, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
thank you very much... i'm going to create a new account there asap. Rtnf (talk) 01:48, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Welcomed you! @Rtnf BigKrow (talk) 01:51, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Wikimedia NYC have started discussions on their proposal for stewardship at Talk:Wikinews Pulse. Miraheze and WM NYC are in discussions with Wikimedia Legal and I am fairly confident that we will be able to come to agreement to use the Wikinews' trademarks. Legal agreements between the three parties are a complex process but they have been positive and are going well. I don't think it's a good idea to have multiple conflicting future Wikinews' wikis. I am around on both the Wikimedia discord and #wikinews on IRC should you prefer a more realtime discussion that talk pages. RhinosF1 (talk) 07:14, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
So wait until Miraheze makes the new news wiki? @RhinosF1 BigKrow (talk) 10:26, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
So I leave WikiOasis then? @RhinosF1 BigKrow (talk) 10:28, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My suggestion would be that the WikiOasis proposal is not proceeded with. RhinosF1 (talk) 12:31, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can you let me know when the new news wiki is up and running? Thanks. @RhinosF1 BigKrow (talk) 12:47, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The Stewardship by WM NYC section at the top will be the place to check RhinosF1 (talk) 13:38, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your update. I'll keep monitoring this page for further information. I've already sent you more details on Discord. Rtnf (talk) 10:30, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Should I leave WikiOasis then, or? @Rtnf BigKrow (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
in the end, you can personally choose. It's all up to you Rtnf (talk) 17:55, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, guys, all this dithering and bickering is exactly why Wikinews didn't work in its last years. When you attempt to make a news org in a post-TikTok world and literally every step of it requires a plan for a plan to make a plan to do something, you cannot keep up. ~2026-28071-60 (talk)
Your point is well-taken. The nature of the overhead required for journalism (fact-checking, editing, verifying notes) means that actually doing journalism requires a lot of resources or you just kind of film stuff and put it online, which is a kind of approximation of journalism. It's a difficult spot to be in with a volunteer base. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:56, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There is an ongoing proposal at English Wikiversity to rehost English Wikinews content there, see v:Wikiversity:Colloquium#Proposal to rehost Wikinews here. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 15:13, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]
  • Support Support: I support the migration of English Wikinews and have no objection to either self-hosting or moving to Miraheze. However, I believe that the costs and resources required for self-hosting may not be sustainable in the long term. In that regard, Miraheze appears to be a more practical option, if migration is pursued at all. That said, I recognize that migration alone may not resolve the core issues faced by Wikinews, and there is a possibility that some challenges could persist or even worsen. -- -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 14:43, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comment: I found out from this phabricator task that there is a chance wikinews sites and their content could be deleted to redirect to the new wikinews. If that means the content has to be deleted, I would strongly oppose any such migration or handover of Wikinews in the first place. I don't think this is worth it. I still support the migration only if it does not lead to the deletion of Wikinews. -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 13:54, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I would like to wait for further clarification on that before reassessing my support. -- Asked42 (talk · contribs) 14:04, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support To quote Wallace Breen: the alternative, if you can call it that, is total extinction. If this community wants to survive it has literally no other option since Wikimedia has officially begun shutting down Wikinews. Mind you, the content is in no immediate danger, but the userbase and all associated activity will cease to exist without migration. --Dronebogus (talk) 18:34, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Nothing else to say, If Wikimedia needs to drop unnecessary licensing compatibility concerns, let it go. --~2026-20743-13 (talk) 05:11, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose a simple migration - Though I'm not sure what Support/Oppose mean in this context, given there is no formal proposition to support or oppose. The above says "discussing whether and how the English Wikinews project may consider migration." I'll reiterate what I stated previously: Any effort MUST do better than the initial consultation back in 2004 (Wikinews/Vote) which had no plan at all, and was simply an expression of interest in trying something. We have a lot more knowledge about what didn't work out, and without critically addressing them, I can't see how anyone should support a reboot based in doing the same thing. - Fuzheado (talk) 15:08, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Please clarify what you would suggest to change. I thought a few possible changes
    1. possibly allow publishing news 'stub' which is only partially "reviewed", with a tag on the article that it was only approved by 'no plagiarism and seems a current event' criteria. then a full review can be done later. if article was done well, it gets tagged as 'good article' / 'featured article' like some pages do in English Wikipedia. this could help to reduce number of articles which get delayed and then deleted as stale because they are not fully verified, while also increases the risk that the article content is not fully accurate. in my view it is necessary to accept that risk initially and then, after there are at least 2-3 reviewers and 5-6 authors for each major region (5 continent regions and 5-6 topics), then, start to tighten the criteria, while maintaining collaborative and fast paced environment to ensure articles don't get deleted as stale.
    2. keep the model 'publish today, archive a few days later, then don't improve; write separate article for new events that are related'. an article is a news report at the date, not a history of everything in that area. this in my view is still not Wikipedia.
    3. create software for users to more easily discover each other and discover what is happening in their preferred topic/region. i tried to find Australia based contributors and i got familiar with like one new person each two years and they did not necessarily stick around. it is much easier to publish more entertaining, more current news in my local area or favourite topic.
    4. focus more on publishing to multiple outlets (audio, you tube, social media). in this century it should not be too hard to create an engaging 2-min video. i was trying to allow including schematics of what happened (drawings based on photos provided in proprietary media outlets) and could not get a discussion how to make it work without copyright infringements. this may include a 'weekly news' published item at, say, noon UTC time each Sunday (for example) as many subscribers like to sit with their ears up, waiting for a particular schedule, like in 'pbs news hour' or 'abc Australia 8AM morning news radio report'.
    maybe other ideas. i am interested to know what you would suggest. Gryllida 02:21, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm kind of hoping that this 'new Wikinews' could emerge as a new global crowdsourcing community of both (1) citizen journalists who hunt news firsthand and (2) news summarizers who collect pieces of information from many news outlets at once. The second model is similar to how Wikipedia works today (with an emphasis on traceability of facts and reliable sources), while the first model is similar to how OpenStreetMap works today (with an emphasis on personal, direct observation on the ground rather than moving data from other sources). Rtnf (talk) 04:53, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support I don't see a good alternative to the proposed migration, so this is likely the best way to keep the site alive. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 00:01, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Migrating Wikinews to Miraheze seems to be a good idea. --Agusbou2015 (talk) 14:42, 16 April 2026 (UTC)--Agusbou2015 (talk) 14:42, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Neutral No sense in migrating Wikinews if theprojects's structural flaws are not addressed. The same problems we faced here will just happen again otherwise. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lofi Gurl (talk)
    @Lofi Gurl: I think we can drop some unnecessary extra "structural flaw"s, e.g. DPL. --~2026-23305-80 (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per above, moving to any hosting wiki platform would be fine, but I oppose moving to Miraheze. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 16:32, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    why? Rtnf (talk) 17:56, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • I oppose any attempt to delete the content of the English Wikinews from Wikimedia Foundation sites. If the content is to moved somewhere, it should be moved to another Wikimedia Foundation site. Article II of the Wikimedia Foundation bylaws says "The Foundation will make and keep useful information from its projects available on the Internet free of charge, in perpetuity". I note the words "in perpetuity". I note that some editions of Wikipedia already have a "News" namespace (Wikinews#Languages that use Wikipedia to serve their Wikinews). Obviously, I do not object to content of the English Wikinews being reproduced on non-WMF sites provided that content is not deleted from Wikimedia Foundation sites. James500 (talk) 13:29, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @James500 We could make an amendment of it by simply a RFC, can't we? ~2026-23305-80 (talk) 01:03, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @James500 nobody said anything about deleting content from WMF sites, it will remain there. Well very well (talk) 14:05, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Another user said that it might be deleted. I was just responding to what the other user said. James500 (talk) 19:13, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support: Well at this point, if migration is going to happen, then let it happen as soon as possible; there is no longer any meaning in dragging it out. However, I hope there can be deep involvement from Wikimedia New York City, so as to preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the collaboration and traditions within the Wikimedia framework.
In addition, the prerequisite for all of this is a proper and comprehensive archive within the Wikimedia framework that reaches at least the standard of a soft closure! And we absolutely should obtain this prerequisite! A soft closure should mean a soft closure. Even from the perspective of volunteers only, in this way can justice be done to our past contributors, some of whom have even passed away already (for example, many veteran users on English Wikinews); they only knew they were contributing to the Wikimedia movement but not others.
Of course, if you allow us to continue using the domain name, and place the archive on a new website within the Wikimedia framework, that could also be really considered. We would also preferably need appropriate soft redirects in any case. ~ Sheminghui.WUHappy Brithday ZHWN!(talk) 02:36, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Spanish Wikinews (es.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@AlvaroMolina, Ezarate, Green Mostaza, ProtoplasmaKid, Shooke, Superzerocool, and XalD: ^^ --~2026-20532-83 (talk) 06:56, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi also, @Marinna My good colleague:)~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:17, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]

Comment Comment Para mi el sitio web se tiene que archivar y poner en modo no escritura. Saludos, ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 23:39, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

French Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the French Wikinews (fr.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@Athozus, Grondin, Rome2, SleaY, and Zetud: ^^ --~2026-20532-83 (talk) 06:57, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]

Comment Comment After reading issues No. 282 (July 5, 2025) and No. 291 (April 5, 2026) of RAW, the French Wikipedia newsletter, it seems to me that the most likely options would be to merge the content of French Wikinews either into French Wikipedia via a new namespace, or into an external project under a compatible license. Nevertheless, given the project’s current activity, I fear that the site’s long-term future may be to be archived. As I am not a Wikinews contributor, this is solely my personal opinion. [In french: Suite à la lecture des numéro n°282 (05/07/2025) et n°291 (05/04/2026) du RAW, infolettre de Wikipédia en français, il me semble que les options les plus probables seraient de fusionner le contenu de Wikinews en français soit dans Wikipédia en français via un nouvel espace de noms, soit dans un projet externe sous licence compatible. Néanmoins, eu égard à l'activité du projet, je crains que le devenir à long terme du site soit son archivage. N'étant pas un wikinewsien, mon avis n'engage que moi.] L0Ldu82 (talk) 19:46, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral Neutral I'm for and against. I'm against the transfer to Wikipedia. This project has relentlessly tried to denigrate us for over twenty years. The clique that makes its own rules would have a field day distorting or manipulating the data until it is completely misrepresented. Neither forgotten, nor forgiven. But, I'm for the transfer to another wiki. Je suis pour et contre à la fois. Je suis opposé à tout transfert sur Wikipédia. Ce projet n'a eu de cesse de nous dénigrer pendant plus de vingt-ans. La clique qui fait sa loi aurait beau jeu de déformer ou de triturer les données jusqu'à les les dénaturer. Ni oubli, ni pardon. Par contre, je suis favorable pour un transfert sur un autre wiki.-- Bertrand GRONDIN  → (Talk) 10:09, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Italian Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Italian Wikinews (it.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@Ferdi2005, Gce, and Mannivu: ^^ --~2026-20532-83 (talk) 06:58, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]

Likely Likely although many technical aspects are unclear to me: will the users and logins remain the same as they are now (via WMF)? Will the project continue to be considered a "sister project," linkable within other WMF projects? What licensing, jurisdiction, security, and privacy law features apply? --Infosfera (talk) 19:27, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To provide what clarification I can on some of these on Miraheze specifically, it would be able to allow projects to retain whatever their current licensing is, abd Miraheze is under U.S. jurisdiction, like Wikimedia, and details its privacy policy here. Security (if you are referring to infrastructure/software security) would be better answered by someone other than I, but we are typically pretty involved in vetting things we allow on the project in that regard. I can say with some degree of certainty that carrying over logins would not be possible given our existing global account system, contributors would have to create a new Miraheze account (save for anons, obviously). We could reassign old edits to the new accounts.
I don't know for sure what Wikinews' status within Wikimedia would become, but I doubt it would remain designated as a full 'sister project'. I would hope it can keep updated interwiki links and overall stay connected to the other WM projects though. PixDeVl (talk) 20:47, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@PixDeVl Tks. I think that maintaining the connection with other Wikimedia projects is essential (interwikis and hopefully some kind of sister project status), regardless of hosting. -- Infosfera (talk) 19:15, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Oppose This is de facto the end of Wikinews project: without SUL from Wikipedia and with the risk to loose lose part of the content the possibilities that Italian Wikinews is coming to be a dead project is very but very high, so I can only be against this proposal. --Gce (talk) 18:38, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Gce What "risk to loose lose part of the content"? -- Infosfera (talk) 19:09, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Errors in transfer can cause the loss of part of the articles (it's a possibility); you have to consider also that the transfer will surely cause problems of attribution of some edits (you have to consider that a part of the user will not follow Wikinews in its new webspace, especially without the possibility to use SUL and the necessity to re-register again. Gce (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Gce I don't see any problem in this: "User:xy on it.wikinews.org" can be used to attribute the edits. It's the same if somebody want to attribute a photo from commons or a text from wikipedia on a different media (site, book, etc). Infosfera (talk) 19:28, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Infosfera Another question is that whether loose in Gce's context above is a typo (so it should be "lose" with just single "o" instead of double), as I've asked a linguist that the word "loose" can really be offensive as it may be meant to someone to attack one girl's v***a by sticks. ~2026-23305-80 (talk) 05:07, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@2026-23305-80 Of course, it certainly was a typo by Gce, merely copy/pasted by me. No need to think evil about it. --Infosfera (talk) 12:13, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
In una sezione dove si discute della versione in italiano avrebbe dovuto pensare che la maggior parte degli interventi sarebbero stati non di madrelingua e solo lui sa da dove gli è uscito quel significato, che NON è riportato nemmeno su Wikizionario in inglese ed ANZI addirittura riporta la forma che ho usato è da considerarsi un errore o un modo di scrivere desueto e non l'atto di violenza che ha scritto; ritengo MOLTO più offensivo il suo intervento, basato su non si sa cosa e su "ho chiesto ad un linguista" che porta ad un'uscita fuori da ogni logica e che vuole seminare zizzania laddove non ve n'era alcuna traccia, che non il mio modo di scrivere sbagliato e/o desueto. --Gce (talk) 17:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Gce I'm also interested in which contents will be lost? ~2026-22266-47 (talk) 06:12, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Oppose I'm agree with Gce. --LittleWhites (talk) 07:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Support Per Infosfera, dear Gce, please, no more offensive typos. --~2026-23305-80 (talk) 05:09, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support see my comment on it.wikinews for details.--Una tantum (talk) 08:33, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on the discussion at n:it:Wikinotizie:Bar/Ciao the Italian language community seems ready to archive the project and move on. (Participation in the discussion has been minimal.) Some minor things will need to be decided and handled on time, for example what to leave on the main page. Nemo 21:08, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nemo bis the discussion is more a "goodbye" made by it.wikipedia peoples to the Wikinews staff, not a "decision" from wikinews-involved peoples. A real discussion on what to do it's only this one, and in my opinion it lacks the technical and formal elements on which to make an informed decision, e.g.:
    1. the migrated new-WN can remain a linkable sisterproject in other wikimedia projects, also if hosted outside WMF?
    2. what relationships and technical connections with Commons?
    3. who hosts and with what guarantees, under what legislation?
    4. login can be done via WMF, the userbase can be imported?
    5. the "idea/mission" of new-wikinews remain the same (essentially, on it.wn last few months was "large space to zero-interest old-breaking-news on anything, retrieved from various sources and already well covered by other faster medias") or can be refined? I think that with some (strong) "quality fixes" WN could very well stay and be consistent with the WMF mission/ecosystem.
    it's difficult to make a decision without a clear idea on all this aspects and playing rules. -- Infosfera (talk) 08:38, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    +1 Michael.C.Wright (talk) 12:30, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Tks @Michael.C.Wright. Despite of idea to "Facilitate structured discussion" as stated at the top of this page, it's very difficult to follow a discussion line... Before decide stuff about a new host, I think WMF must describe its idea on points 1, 2 and 4. But is not good to discuss this in "Italian Wikinews" subdiscussion... -- Infosfera (talk) 14:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Japanese Wikinews (ja.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused. Takuan Yuzuki（TALK・History） 10:25, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions

[edit]

Votes

[edit]

条件付賛成 I'm weak support wikinews transfer for Miraheze. Miraheze is use wiki system of wikimedia too. The reason is that news that can be freely edited is preserved. However, I am concerned about whether Japanese-speaking users will be willing to edit both the Japanese Wikinews and Wikicollection.-- Takuan Yuzuki（TALK・History） 10:55, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

私は、ウィキニュースをMirahezeに移行することにやや賛成です。Mirahezeもウィキメディアのウィキシステムを採用しています。その理由は、自由に編集できるニュース記事が維持されるからです。しかし、日本語圏のユーザーが、日本語版ウィキニュースとウィキコレクションの両方を編集してくれるかどうかが懸念されます。 Takuan Yuzuki（TALK・History） 11:03, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Wish to have more contributors on the new platform, ja speakers would not really interested in Wikimedia-only platform. --~2026-20743-13 (talk) 05:24, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Especially If they are going, I of course choose to follow. Of course, as the Jawn reporter who was almost the only one to actively participate in the public consultation, this does not mean that I accept the baseless closure decision. Additionally, I hope the migration will not affect our soft shutdown archive and status within the Wm framework.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:03, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
合意が形成されたとしてMirahezeに申請を出してもよろしいでしょうか。-- Takuan Yuzuki（TALK・History） 01:51, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
その必要はないかと思います。Talk:Migration of Wikinews and future hosts#Clarification: WM NYC and Miraheze joint bid and requests on Mirahezeに記載されている通り、現在協議中のものであり、WMFから明確かつ完全な承認が得られるまでは、個人（特にローカル管理者やBCではない人）からの新規プロジェクト申請は承認しないとのことです。まずはWMF、WMNYC・Mirahezeの協議等を待つべきかと存じます。 nanona(15) 01:12, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
わかりました。ありがとうございます。 Takuan Yuzuki（TALK・History） 10:30, 7 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
私は、WMNYCが可能な限り関与し、ウィキメディアの枠組み内における協力とつながりをできる限り維持してほしいと願っています。それは私たちの伝統にも、ウィキメディア運動全体の利益にも合致するからです。もちろん、あらゆる前提は、既存のアーカイブが悪影響を受けないことの上に依然として成り立っています。~ Sheminghui.WUHappy Brithday ZHWN!(talk) 03:18, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Polish Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Polish Wikinews (pl.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@Kajtus von Rzywiec, Marek Mazurkiewicz, Openbk, Pastooshek, and Ynnarski: ^^ --~2026-20532-83 (talk) 06:58, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Raczej nie mamy mocy żeby tworzyć własy projekt. Rozważam dołączenie do globalnego projektu jeśli on się uda ale na razie czuję duże zniechęcenie po tej paskudnej decyzji fundacji. Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 10:53, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]
  • Support Support I'm sure it will grow over time. It would be nice if we could replicate local solutions. In pl news, for example, categories are sorted not alphabetically but by date. The newest ones go to the top. This actually allowed us to abandon DPL. A bot inserts leads on the main page and in the main portals. And a few other solutions emerged during the project's development ;) @AnnaPruszkowianka, OliwierJaszczyszyn, OliwierJaszczyszyn, and Igor123121: ^^ Hedger z Castleton (talk) 10:43, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support While it is sad to see Wikinews go, on the other hand the closure was inevitable. Going forward I think we should adopt a more decentralised model to avoid the repetition of ”site closure = everything's dead” scenario. Rather than just migrating Polish Wikinews' content somewhere else (and starting over from here) we should organise a sort of an alliance between independently maintained websites breaking news that happen across the world. I believe this approach would be more resistant; if suddenly one website breaks off (either because of winding down all operations, or simply not wanting to engage further), in an ideal world the stability of news breaking operations should not be impaired significantly on a mutually-curated Wikinews future knockoff. OliwierJaszczyszyn (talk) 15:02, 4 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Portuguese Wikinews (pt.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@CommonsDelinker, DARIO SEVERI, Edu!, and Eta Carinae: ^^ --~2026-20532-83 (talk) 07:00, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have pinged a bot. Well very well (talk) 07:53, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]

Russian Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Russian Wikinews (ru.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]
The elephant in the room is whether the bot-imported articles should be brought over or not. I'm talking about fruits of the infamous bot activity on ruwikinews that took down all wikis back in 2021.
Since those articles were imported, ruwikinews is mostly an aggregator/mirror for external news sources. Most of those sources are still up. A potential re-hosting of Wikinews as-is would be a mirror of a mirror.
Currently, the number of remaining articles stands at 1,465,869 (in two categories: one, two). It can be easily seen that these constitute 98% of all ruwikinews articles and what's more, 83% of the total article count in all languages.
Please note that I'm talking about articles, not pages. When considering pages in all namespaces (~7M in total as of now; used to be ~15M), one needs to remember that every article has a corresponding comment page. Also, the same bot was used to create millions of auxiliary pages and categories. An enormous slew of those pages (~7M) was deleted last autumn. A few weeks ago another batch of ~3M category deletions was started. It is hoped that this will be completed by May 4.
The whole migration, if it happens, would be radically changed depending on this decision. AtUkr (talk) 22:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest not importing them. It would be better to move them to Russian Wikisource or leave them in the read-only wiki. Well very well (talk) 15:08, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Unless there is significant desire from the Russian Wikinews community that these articles be kept for some reason, I agree that there doesn’t seem to be a reason to import them to a new hosting arrangement, and removing them likely would remove a good deal of pressure on the migration process and long term hosting. PixDeVl (talk) 16:44, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Let me remind about the reason for these mirrored articles. The idea was, if Wikinews arranges a free license for all news articles over the internet, and if Wikinews acquires all these articles, then Wikinews will be the most valuable and the most useful source of news in the whole world. Then Wikinews will overpower Reuters, and Associated Press, and even TASS. In other words, the idea was to create a Wikinews site for all the news articles (like Commons stays for images), and to gain everything into one Wikinews site. One site to bring them all, one site to find them, one site to gain them all and with free license bind them. -- PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:10, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you kindly for the context! If this was the reason and ruwikinews did succeed in that, there may be a valid argument to retain the pages, but I think that would have to be something the community would need to show an overall, continuing desire for. If the community consents to move to Miraheze with WMNYC, I think Miraheze’s Technology Team might need to verify that the import would technically doable in full, but that’s a question for a later stage of this process. PixDeVl (talk) 19:24, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid you're being misinformed. The man behind the mass imports, User:Krassotkin, said this in August 2020, just after he finished the first batch of imports:

All in all, the conclusion is surprising. We still have very little news, and what there is is heavily skewed, failing to cover several very important topics. For example, there is nothing on sport; science, entertainment, society news and so on are also completely absent. Yet all of this interests readers—perhaps even more so than what is currently available. Incidentally, Interfax publishes around 300 news pieces a day, and TASS around 700 — meaning we are still far from covering the day’s news. Therefore, the question remains of finding outlets that will switch to free licences so that we can synchronise with them. It would be beneficial for them too, as they pass everything on to aggregators anyway, and all high-quality content is rewritten instantly—without links—but with Wikinews and regular uploads, the benefits for them will increase over time.
— User:Krassotkin, 3 August 2020

And a little later:

I also see a few issues with systematically attracting new sites. [I. e. attracting into free licensing.] The main one is that we need to be of value to these sites, and the only way we can do that is by driving readers, customers and advertisers to them in numbers commensurable with their overall traffic. Take Yandex.News, for example. It brings in the bulk of traffic for media outlets, which is why they readily provide their content to it. But even if we aren’t the main source, just a notable one, they’ll start working with us. Otherwise, it’s not profitable for them, and we can only persuade them on the basis of charity and support. And such collaboration yields little return. This is one of the reasons why I started importing their archives: with ten thousand pages, there is a greater likelihood that someone will click through to them than with a hundred. After that, I plan to focus on areas that generate non-news traffic, so as to redirect it to the news articles. On the category pages, for example. We have a perfectly decent film module. We could create categories for all of them using Wikidata; this would generate some traffic, which would ultimately flow to the news articles (including the free ones), and we become useful to them.
— User:Krassotkin, 31 August 2020

And when questioned about the quality of imported content, he had this to say:

They’re already ruining the Russian Wikipedia with all this rhetorics on «quality» and «disgrace»; let’s not repeat those mistakes. What’s bringing the news project into disrepute is the lack of news, the fake stories, and the bias in the reporting. Everything else is fine.
— User:Krassotkin, 30 August 2020

So there you go. The mastermind of the whole thing cared little about quality (which he disregarded) or traffic (which he directed towards other media). The only metric he valued was quantity.
This, he achieved in a peculiar manner. He's been gone for years and only now we got to cleaning up after him: hundreds of pages of sponsored content, tens of thousands of ad inserts, millions of empty categories serving no purpose other than 'generating traffic' for other news sites. One wonders if that's a legacy worth preserving. AtUkr (talk) 20:35, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, in this whole plan — quantity was meant a base for traffic, and traffic was meant a base for quality. To overpower TASS, we need to have about 1000 news articles a day. -- PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:31, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@AtUkr Anyway, Why are you quoting such messages from a user that is WMF globally banned? ~2026-21676-19 (talk) 05:46, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
ruwikinews did succeed in that
It did not.
These articles can indeed matter as an "archive" of news under a free license, very true — but then they should better go to Wikisource. Wikinews is about Wikipedians writing news articles/interviews/commentaries together, not for storing archive news from other websites. There already is a wiki project for storing older books, articles, and other written pieces of media without copyright. Well very well (talk) 21:10, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
OToneH, I support your idea about Wikisource. OT other hand, Russian Wikisource is strictly based on the fiction texts printed on paper. Neither news archives, neither newspapers, nor research articles, nor even popular science books and journals are available in there. The idea you underline (and I support) is not the mainstream idea for Russian Wikisource now. -- PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:28, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
PereslavlFoto, в Русской Викитеке можно размещать и газеты и журналы и исследовательские статьи и научную литературу при условии, что они общественном достоянии или под свободной лицензией. Что касается новостей, то будут приняты только те, что публиковались в печати. См. ru:s:Справка:Что содержит Викитека --Butko (talk) 08:20, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is actually not true. Wikisource hosts, for example, an archive of the online project Lentapedia. Well very well (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Well very well If we are worrying about Wikidata-related stuffs, there's indeed another thread opened largely above ~2026-28533-20 (talk) 10:40, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such desire from community, at least definitely not from me. BilboBeggins (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
In January, a small beginner news agency from Kazakhstan, PolitesNews, began automatically importing (one article per hour) its own news licensed under CC-BY-SA. U:AlinaPolites is their employee. Таёжный лес (talk) 19:00, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Not a Russian speaker, but нет to transferring any bot imports to a new domain. Per WVW, these belong on Wikisource as free third-party text content. Wikinews is supposed to be about original content, ideally original reporting. Dronebogus (talk) 14:44, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As stated by Butko above, Wikisource accepts physical publications only, which users then make transcriptions of. If a news piece never appeared in print, it's not eligible for Wikisource. AtUkr (talk) 16:45, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Then change the rules Dronebogus (talk) 00:32, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Then consider Internet Archive? dringsim 05:25, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is actually not true. Wikisource hosts, for example, an archive of the online project Lentapedia. Well very well (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest importing everything that passes copyright. I realized 'Polites' imported content do not always succeed in this, while they themselves mark their site content as a creative commons licence, they plagiarise substantial part of their content from elsewhere. Manual checking may be required for each page. In a new hosting, it will be substantially harder to fight copyright related lawsuits, in my opinion. Gryllida 02:13, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ssr, Dimetr, A.Morgunovskaya, Butko, Oleg Yunakov, mitte27, Фред-Продавец звёзд, DonSimon, Lesless, VladimirPF, Artem Korzhimanov, Gryllida, Voltmetro, Byzantine, Vulpo, Iniquity, Iluvatar, Carn, Rampion, Muthota, Андрей Романенко, Taratarussia, Nicoljaus, Schekinov Alexey Victorovich, Niklitov, Erokhin, KabanDanish, Ivtorov, AlinaPolites, Dmitry Rozhkov: a notification for you of the discussion here. Well very well (talk) 07:56, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Очень не люблю, когда мне пингуют из Викиновостей и по поводу Викиновостей. Это одно из моих больших разочарований, я потратил на этот проект время сопостовимое с созданием тысяч статей в Википедии и время это потрачено, как оказалось, впустую. Красоткин, при всех его заслугах, стремился сделать скорее самостоятельный от Википедии проект, я же видел ВН как раздел Википедии, который мог бы освещать события, кои не проходили по значимости в Википедии (скажем уничтожение ОрКешником отдельного жилого дома и гибель одного-двух мирных украинских граждан). Затем Красоткина по довольно мутному предлогу глобально забанили. Знамя лидера подхватил человек с откровенно сортирным хамским лексиконом... После вылитых на меня пары ушатов помоев, я заходил в Викиновости если только случайно. И я приму любое решение сообщества. Это уже не мой проект. Только прошу: не пингуйте мне больше, пожалуйста. Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Incnis Mrsi, you suggested a good option for migration at the RUWN-forum. Could you extend it here, please? DonSimon (talk) 21:01, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Not really a good option. Just informed ruWN members that had they some 〈digital〉 premise (that is, an Internet host suitable for HTTPd and PHP) and some modest money to keep the data safe, I would set up the software. But no premise in sight ⇒ no that option. I won’t take part in any tech scrabble at Miraheze, sorry. --Incnis Mrsi (talk) 04:48, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vote (for community news)

[edit]
Support Support Sure they should be migrated (to Miraheze). @mitte27 has recently done a titanic job in cleaning them up and keeping in that way. Well very well (talk) 21:01, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Support. ruWN have a living community, with new articles being written all the time, and it would be great if it continued to exist. Таёжный лес (talk) 06:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I also support moving of imported news, especially when thousands of them were already categorized, illustrated and updated with links. Таёжный лес (talk) 18:55, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Support Sure they should be migrated. --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 06:52, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Support Apparently, it needs to be transferred to Miraheze, and here will remain read only. Demetrius Talpa (talk) 09:48, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Викиновости и Викитека - это разные проекты с разными правилами, которые решают разные задачи. Как минимум понадобится изменение правил, так как в текушей редакции ru:s:Справка:Что содержит Викитека запрещено размещать произведения, не публиковавшиеся в печати. Если мигрировать, то лучше выбрать вики-проект с правилами, схожими с Викиновостями, или создать новый на альтернативной площадке --Butko (talk) 08:34, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Вычеркиваю реплику. Неправильно понял разбивку по секциям. За что голосуем-то в секции "Votes"? --Butko (talk) 08:38, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
За переезд Викиновостей на другой хостинг. Или против. Кому как нравится. AtUkr (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
А куда мигрировать-то? Товарищ Аарон (обс. вклад) 13:19, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Support for original content only. I do care about news created by Wikimedians, me included. All the rest is not worth caring. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Per above, there are too many Russophobia panoramas around Wikinews, having a good new home can really help Russians to speech their real freedom, instead of painted free. --~2026-20743-13 (talk) 05:26, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Let's work together on the new platform! However, I hope this won't affect our rightful soft-closed status and archived copies within the Wikimedia framework. Also, this doesn't mean I'm acknowledging the closure decision to ignore facts, procedures, and the results of the RfC and consultation! -- Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:13, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vote (for imported news)

[edit]
 Weak oppose. There are a few pluses and minuses:
  • Oppose ⠀ The number of imported news is huge (~1.5M) and much larger than all other WNs pages in total across all WNs combined (about 200k IIRC).
  • Oppose ⠀ Follows from the first point — archive news will require much more maintenance.
  • Support  These news really do deserve archiving, which though can be done on Wikisource.
  • Support  Currently there is a cleanup project working on them, which also deserves finishing and for that it may be done on Miraheze. Though, if importing to Wikisource, we can as well just do the complete import-from-blank (except one or two sites that've died completely).
Well very well (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Serbian Wikinews (sr.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@Djordjes, Laslovarga, MikyM, Milicevic01, Жељко Тодоровић, and نوفاك اتشمان: ^^ --~2026-20532-83 (talk) 07:01, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]

Chinese Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Chinese Wikinews (zh.wikinews.org) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

本章节用于讨论是否及如何考虑将中文维基新闻（zh.wikinews.org）项目迁移，包括潜在的迁移目标、方法和时间线。我们邀请参与者分享有关其对是否支持迁移、其推荐的存储选项（例如自建网站、Miraheze或其他平台）的看法，以及任何针对潜在迁移的关心、条件或建议。请在您的评论后面签名，并保持讨论具建设性和针对性。

本章節用於討論是否及如何考慮將中文維基新聞（zh.wikinews.org）項目遷移，包括潛在的遷移目標、方法和時間線。我們邀請參與者分享有關其對是否支持遷移、其推薦的存儲選項（例如自建網站、Miraheze或其他平台）的看法，以及任何針對潛在遷移的關心、條件或建議。請在您的評論後面簽名，並保持討論具建設性和針對性。

Discussions

[edit]
  • 我個人傾向於遷移到Miraheze。--~2026-20532-83 (talk) 06:04, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • 出于个人原因反对迁移到Miraheze，原因是不想连累托管在Miraheze上的其他wiki被GFW屏蔽 --Sksawf (talk) 12:53, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sksawf我覺得閣下沒有必要擔憂GFW，這個項目反正沒多少大陸人編輯，通篇都港澳台碼農自我YY，再說GFW大概率會手下留情的，現在管理GFW的工程師們喜歡針對性封殺，就算遷移過去，大概率接受遷移進來的子網域會被封，但不至於連累其他子域。就像Fandom，上面有些“中文偽基百科”、“香港網絡大典”的語言版本都是被封的，但除此之外也沒有聽說被封。 ~2026-20743-13 (talk) 05:06, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ?我就大陆背景的，意味は何。不过确实，你的分析完全有道理，不至于连累吧 ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 10:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    “現在管理GFW的工程師們喜歡針對性封殺”
    想多了，现在是2026年，从去年年中开始GFW就倾向于搞一刀切了 Sksawf (talk) 09:34, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sksawf按阁下的说法苹果Appstore也应该全封掉，而且我也算是少数几个可以接触到GFW维护者的了，我会帮阁下求情的。 ~2026-28317-83 (talk) 04:40, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @~2026-28317-83 ……你还真别说，现在App Store网页版用中国大陆IP访问会强制重定向回国区，而且也不能在不填写付款方式的情况下修改苹果账户地区了
    另外，你说你能接触到GFW维护者？那我还是秦始皇呢 Sksawf (talk) 05:32, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Fandom没被封是因为Fandom在国内是合法网站，甚至用户协议里有专门为了适配中国PIPL的条款，足以说明Fandom至少进行过本地化
    而Miraheze……中国不允许境外非营利组织开展活动，比如Mozilla Sksawf (talk) 09:38, 9 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sksawf

Votes

[edit]

Sylheti Wikinews

[edit]

This section is for discussing whether and how the Sylheti Wikinews (Sylheti Wikinews) project may consider migration, including potential destinations, approaches, and timelines. Participants are invited to share their views on whether they support migration, their preferred hosting options (e.g., self-hosted, Miraheze, or other platforms), as well as any concerns, requirements, or suggestions for a potential transition. Please sign your comments and keep discussions constructive and focused.

Discussions

[edit]

@Пан Хаунд 2, নবাব, AbuSayeed, Alim Uddin Chowdhury, and Anik Sarker: --(talk) 21:21, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ Why ask here? There was eventually no Sylheti Wikinews established. ~2026-20990-08 (talk) 14:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This decision also affects the Sylheti Wikinews community currently in the Incubator. Discussions like this are part of shaping the future of Wikinews projects. There are many examples of projects moving from Incubator to Miraheze (e.g., Incubator Plus), and Sylheti already has a presence on Miraheze (kilakita.miraheze.org). So it is reasonable for contributors to share their views on possible changes or discontinuation. If possible, please consider registering and logging in when commenting, so others can better understand and communicate with you.--(talk) 22:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ Isn't this already being discussed at incubator:I:RFD#Incubator:Requests_for_deletions#Wikinews_test_projects? ~2026-21676-19 (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, it is an eligible project, doesn't meet the criteria of deletion and subject to this discussion. If possible, please consider registering and logging in when commenting. This helps others better understand and communicate with you, and ensures your participation is taken as a constructive part of the discussion.--(talk) 07:09, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ It's the board's decision to consider revoking those eligibility of Wikinews requests that were marked eligible by langcom, as part of fully closure of the entire Wikinews project(s), and hence it's just the question when langcom members will do so. ~2026-21676-19 (talk) 05:34, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, If and when any users (really, not only you) are certainly concerning the RFL requests regarding Wikinews, I left a message to one langcom membership which looks like 3rd active (the top two active members are having their talk pages semi-protected, but if logged-in users are also willing to leave such messages, I certainly welcome). ~2026-21676-19 (talk) 05:41, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

[edit]

Wikinews in Incubator

[edit]

Discussions

[edit]

I think all of Wikinews content in Incubator also should be moved, especially large projects such as Bengali one. Таёжный лес (talk) 22:21, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that make sense ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:04, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Таёжный лес Isn't this already being discussed at incubator:I:RFD#Incubator:Requests_for_deletions#Wikinews_test_projects? ~2026-21676-19 (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if there's a way for all of the smaller langauges (or perhaps all languaegs) to share a single wiki, similar to incubator (perhaps in a cleaner way? e.g., sharing a single Main: namespace with categories for language) –SJ talk  17:51, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Sj: That could be similar to the multilingual Wikisource (wikisource.org). —— Eric Liu（Talk） 11:07, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Ericliu1912
  1. Are those Incubator Wikinews test projects still active? Certainly no, they are currently early-bird set to read-only mode.
  2. Will they be deleted et al? At the moment, no, though this is being discussed on I:RFD section.
  3. Should they be migrated to other platforms? Ideally yes, but some of those are having no subpages, or only had mainpage with nothing translated, those may have less to no benefits for migrating.
  4. Can they be temporary approved as many of them are having RFLs verified as eligible? Can some of them be created with temporary new subdomains (e.g. Sylheti)? Sadly with tears, no as per Jon Harald Søby's talk page.
~2026-23305-80 (talk) 02:37, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
So personally, I would suggest to close this section (and above #Sylheti Wikinews) as we are having a separate hub for discussing the relevant issues around Incubator. ~2026-23305-80 (talk) 02:38, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Eric: Yes, similar to multilingual Wikisource. I believe anything on Incubator will be recoverable if those communities want to work elsewhere (the interface string translations don't get lost), so maybe the question there is simply how to ping all of the participants / contributors to incubator so far to let them know there's a new multilingual site available to migrate / preserve any of their draft work. –SJ talk  16:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

@Sj: I wonder what's your meaning here, Incubator-related issues already has their own thread to discuss, repeating anything on this page of Meta about Incubator will only result split of discussions which are really unfair for quoting. It's better to have a centralized place for one topic instead of opening multiple places to discuss same one. --~2026-23305-80 (talk) 02:25, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If other language editions have made their decision, then it is indeed reasonable to follow accordingly. The prerequisite, however, is the implementation of equal soft-closure archiving internally, without deletion, and ideally, appropriate soft redirects especially should also be added according to their function. --Sheminghui.WUHappy Brithday ZHWN!(talk) 03:17, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Migration_of_Wikinews_and_future_hosts&oldid=30624780"