Hi Ed, that is perfectly fine and is really a staple for "attention-grabbing" while simultaneously using the title of the blog post within the Facebook preview as complementary copy. I speak more from a social media/ marketing perspective, of course.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Ed Erhart <[email protected]> wrote: > We could probably just go with "Read this editor's advice first," as the > previewed title will contain the rest, but I'm not sure if that's best > practice for Facebook. Michael, Joe, your thoughts? > > --Ed > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Juliet Barbara <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Ok, for FB what about: >> >> Thinking about paying for a Wikipedia article? Read this editor's advice >> first. >> >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Ed Erhart <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> @Juliet, that's already in the title of the article which appears as a >>> preview on Facebook. That works great for Twitter, though. >>> >>> --Ed >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Gregory Varnum <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I like that for FB and Twitter. >>>> >>>> -greg >>>> >>>> _______________ >>>> Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later. >>>> >>>> On Sep 21, 2015, at 3:20 PM, Juliet Barbara <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> How about something straightforward like: >>>> >>>> Should you pay for a Wikipedia article? Find out here. [LINK] >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Ed Erhart <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> This is now published after a snafu with WordPress' scheduling >>>>> mechanism. Further proposed Facebook posts: >>>>> >>>>> - "Wikipedia is, after all, an encyclopedia—not a commercial >>>>> directory." >>>>> - No, you should not hire a paid editor who does not disclose that >>>>> fact on Wikipedia. >>>>> >>>>> --Ed >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I guess a further refinement: it can be free of financial obligation >>>>>> in order to participate in Wikipedia in many ways, but plenty of people >>>>>> and >>>>>> organizations are being paid for their involvement, so we need to be >>>>>> careful about the messaging. >>>>>> >>>>>> Pine >>>>>> On Sep 19, 2015 1:38 PM, "Pine W" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Agreed that we should drop any suggestions that everyone who creates >>>>>>> content or does other work is doing so for free. Wikipedia is free (of >>>>>>> financial obligation) as in free to read and share, not as in free to >>>>>>> create, store, maintain, defend, reseaech, and develop. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pine >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Ed Erhart >>>>> Editorial Associate >>>>> Wikimedia Foundation >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Juliet Barbara* >>>> Senior Communications Manager I Wikimedia Foundation >>>> 149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105 >>>> [email protected] I +1 (512) 750-5677 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Social-media mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ed Erhart >>> Editorial Associate >>> Wikimedia Foundation >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *Juliet Barbara* >> Senior Communications Manager I Wikimedia Foundation >> 149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105 >> [email protected] I +1 (512) 750-5677 >> >> > > > -- > Ed Erhart > Editorial Associate > Wikimedia Foundation > -- Michael Guss Research Analyst Wikimediafoundation.org [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Social-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
