Talk:Collaborative journalism

Possible things to expand upon

N cody46 (talk) 19:41, 19 April 2009 (UTC)I've created a section on the history of collaborative journalism, said when the term and practice started to originate, and given some examples of when commonly used collaborative journalism sites were founded. However, I couldn't find a specific date when the term was coined, or who coined it. It could be that nobody coined the term, and that it simply emerged into common usage, as many other terms do. But if anyone can find if/when the term was coined and who coined it, this article would benefit from that being added.

Peer Reviews

This is a great, informative article that is missing very little. The intro section could be broken up into smaller chunks, most notably the "link journalism" section should have its own header. With it's contrast to traditional completion centered media, has collaborative journalism, or any component of collaborative journalism, received any criticism (specifically from those who prefer traditional media)? Are those criticisms valid? One last thing that I was wondering about as I read this is,when did collaborative journalism become mainstream? Was it always around and just now surfaced as a mainstream method, or is this a relative new concept? On a more positive note, the "see also" section and multiple references give credibility to the article. It appears to be well researched and has potential to be a great article. Tcandrew (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

This article is an extensive, clearly organized analysis of a relatively new concept in the world of journalism: collaborative journalism. There is not much left to improve, as it is easy to read and includes reputable references in the bottom, thus making the article credible as well as accurate. An interesting area to work on would perhaps be to explain the timing of the term. When did collaborative journalism come about? Why has it arisen? Basically, it would be helpful for the reader to understand why it hasn't appeared before on wikipedia.

The article does not need much improvement, as it is well-polished already, however it would help to make the distinction between Citizen Journalism, Civic Journalism, Interactive Journalism, Community Journalism, and Collaborative Journalism a bit more clear, rather than cramming all the varying terms into one sentence with links to their respective wikipedia pages. The "see also" page is appropriate to help clear up any confusion between these terms, however a simple sentence of each could be effective. Overall, this article is already very informative and helpful, and needs few adjustments to make it even more professional. Chrisgerding (talk) 03:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Overall, this is a well orchestrated article. It's obvious strengths are found in the large amount of information provided about collaborative journalism and the many helpful, journalism related links. Also, mentioning similar yet distinctly different forms of journalism (i.e. civic and citizen journalism) helps the reader distinguish collaborative journalism more specifically. However, this part of the article is a bit rushed. After reading it I realized that collaborative journalism is different because it involves amateurs and professionals often times working together on one piece, but is this the only difference between them? Is the only difference between collaborative and citizen journalism really only a small technicality concerning who wrote it? In other words, the article would be stronger if it commented more on the significance of collaborative journalism and how it is most commonly used or seen. For example, wiki news often does fact checking on existing articles, thereby, creating a piece of collaborative journalism. Lastly, I found one website that may be helpful to your article. (http://www.tjacobi.com/50226711/collaborative_journalism.php) --Hturley (talk) 02:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

second peer review round- Hillary

strengths- - very credible, do a great job of citing sources and using quotations - I like the section on the right which could link you to similar subjects - accuracy- you were very detailed oriented and that helps you not only be accurate but also be more credible

things to work on- - the original definition, in the first sentence, could be more concise and clear. Maybe try making sentences less complicated and more straight-forward, espcially when trying to give the actual definition - make intro even more clear by separating into different categories (for example, separate how it emerged and what it was) - currency- when did this emerge? talk more about the rise of it and where it came from - expand- something interesting you could add would be some link some links to examples of collaborative journalism to give the reader a real life example —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heharper (talk • contribs) 17:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Collaborative journalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090307204057/http://www.instablogs.com/tour/ to http://www.instablogs.com/tour/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090312060206/http://www.publish2.com/about/what-is-link-journalism to http://www.publish2.com/about/what-is-link-journalism
• Added archive https://archive.is/20090817232727/http://www.digidave.org/2009/03/collaboration-is-queen.html to http://www.digidave.org/2009/03/collaboration-is-queen.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:11, 10 August 2017 (UTC)